*v 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/biblevstraditionOOellirich 


BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION: 


tH  WHICH  THE 


TRUE  TEACHING  OF  THE  BIBLE  IS  MANIFESTED, 


THE 


CORRnPTIONS  OF  THEOLOGIANS  DETECTED, 


AND   THE 


TRADITIONS  OF  MEN  EXPOSED. 


BY   AABON    ELLIS. 

BBt>  AND  MUCH  ENLARQED        ;} 

BY   THOMAS    EITAD. 


SECOND   EDITION. 


J3'ctD-Pork ; 


PUBLISHED  AT  THE  OFFICE  OF  BIBLE  EXAMINER, 

No.  140  Fulton-street. 

1853. 


±^^i/:0 


JOHN  J.  KEED,  Printer,  16  Spruce-Stre«t,  N.  Y. 


P  E  E  F  A  0  K 


Our  TfTLE  wodld  seem  to  Indicate  that  we  liave  exposed 
^every  case  where  the  "  Traditions  of  men  have  made  void  the 
nvord  of  God.**  But  not  so:  this  would  require  volumes.  But 
hy  attacking  eiTor  in  its  strongest  hold,  we  do  much  to  overturn 
^ts  whole  foundation.  And  we  Tenttire  to  affirm  that  he  who 
«hall  embrace  the  truths  treated  of  m  this  book,  will  be  desirous 
<of  pursuing  the  investigation  still  further.  In  these  pages  we 
'have  more  particularly  ^jonfi-ned  ourselves  to  the  scriptural 
elucidation  of  The  Mortality  of  Man,  The  Unconsciousness  of  the 
Dead,  and  the  Bestructimi  of  the  Wicked ;  but  we  have  likewise 
investigated  tiie  Nature  of  Man,  The  Penalty  of  the  Law,  The 
mature  of  the  Sacrifice  of  ^Christ,  Endless  Life  obtainable  only 
tthrough  -Christ.  The  Ref^urrection  of  the  Dead,  The  nature  of 
Hell,  The  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom  and  its  Location,  and  Tarious 
other  matters  that  are  not  :ge«eraHy  understood  in  these  days 
of  fables.  The  Immortality  of  the  Soul,  and  the  necessary  de- 
parture from  the  sense  of  Scriptitre  which  this  belief  requires, 
are  the  basis  of  all  sectarianism  and  of  «11  -creeds.  These  abaa- 
'doned,  and  the  way  is  opened  to  the  introduction  of  a  purer 
■Christianity,  based  solely  upon  the  Word  of  the  Living  God. 
3^f  we  can  convince  men  that  God  means  what  he  says,  and  says 
what  he  means,  we  shall  have  opened  the  door  into  the  Templo 
of  Truth  ;  and  may  a  merciful  God  induce  many  to  enter  thereii^, 
Ithat  Ahey  may  be  sanctified  thereby. 


I^OTICE  TO  THE  EEADER 

As  we  have  been  obliged  to  have  recourse  to  quotatiOBS  froio 
the  Hebrew  and  the  Greek,  and  our  work  is  intended  for  popu- 
lar rea(Eng  ^  we  desire  our  readers  to  remember,  that  we  shall 
use  the  radical  word,  in  most  cases,  without  those  inflections 
intended  only  to  point  out  a  different  grammatical  construction, 
which  woold  o»ly  embarrass  the  reader,  and  cause  him  to  sup^ 
pose  that  two  words  were  different  in  their  radical  meaning,  be*- 
cause  slightly  different  in  spelling.  For  the  same  reason  we 
shall  often  use  the  singular  for  the  plural.  In  the  Greek  worda 
we  follow  the  spelling,  not  the  pronunciation  of  the  wiginal ; 
merely  ehangiiag  the  Greek  letters  into  Englishs  and  making  no» 
distinction  between  the  loi^  and  short  eand  a,  and  iatroducing 
an  h  for  the  Greek  asperate  (  ^ ),  as  adri^^  we  spell  hades.  As 
there  is  considerable  variety  in  the  mode  of  spelling  Hebrew 
words  in  English  letters,  we  shall  adopt  the  mode  «sed  by  Prey- 
fessor  Pick,  in  his  Bible  Studenfs  Chncordamce,  excepting  iD 
the  use  of  such  words,  as  the  readers  of  Commentaries  have  be- 
come familiar  with ;  such  words  we  shall  spell  in  the  most  com- 
mon manner.  As  Ruah  instead  of  ruach,  or  rooakh,  spirit  ;^ 
Adam  for  Odom^  man,  or  man  of  earth,  properly,  a  man  made 
of  vegetable  mould.  '^  There  was  not  an  Adam  to  till  the 
adamah;^*  Enoiish,  for  mortal  man]^  Anosheem,  plural  of 
Enoush,  mortal  men ;  chayah.  instead  of  khayoh,  living ;  chay^ 
for  life;  chayim,  for  khayeem,  lives;  5^^/,  for  shemd,  thestat^ 
of  death;  nesme,  for  breath;  nophash,  Tiaphash,  ni^math,  or 
neshomoh,  all  mean  to  breathe,  expire,  and  we  may  sometimes 
comprehend  them  under  the  single  term,  nesme.  The  plural, 
will  generally  be  expressed  by  eem,  or  outhiy  added  i&  the  s5ngl^- 
lar,  and  not  im,  as  in  cherab,  cherubim.  In  our  quotations,  we 
have  often  reversed  the  position  of  the  noun,  and  the  adjective  ex- 
pressing its  quality,  makmg  the  adjective  precede  the  nou». 


BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 


CHAPTER  L 


IKTRODtrCTION 

I  liave  read  the  whole  translation  and  the  margin  of  the 
Old  Testament  eight  times,  and  the  New  Testament  seven 
times;  and  have  carefully  examined  every  text  on  the 
■soul,  the  state  of  the  dead,  and  the  end  of  the  wicked, 
From  this  examination  I  am  thoroughly  convinced  that 
the  whole  man  becomes  unconscious  in  death.  "  In  that 
very  day  his  thoughts  perish."  Ps.  146:  4.  "Neither 
have  they  any  more  a  reward"  until  the  resurrection, 
<Eccl.  9:  5-6;  Luke  14:  14,)  and  "All  the  wicked  will 
<jrod  destroy;"  yea.  He  will  exterminate  both  soul  and 
body  in  Grehenna,  There  is  not  a  single  text  in  the  Old 
Testament  that  will  not  readily  harmonize  with  these 
views,  though  there  are  a  few  texts  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment from  which  inferences  have  been  too  hastily  drawn, 
that  would  seem,  to  a  superficial  observer,  to  oppose  these 
views.  But  where  is  the  doctrine  that  an  incorrect  in- 
ference from  some  obscure  text  does  not  appear  to  con- 
tradict ?  But  patience  and  diligence  in  searching  the 
scriptures,  and  a  comparison  of  scripture  with  scripture, 
allowing  the  Bible  to  be  its  own  dictionary,  and  its  own 
interpreter,  (for  vain  is  the  help  ^f  the  learned  in  this 
matter,)  and  by  carefully  observing  the  context  and  the 
design  of  the  writer,  asking  wisdom  of  Him  "  who  giveth 
to  all  men  liberally  and  upbraideth  not,"  we  may  discover 


B-IBLE  VS.  TKADITIOjT 


the  trutby  and  if  we  are  willing  to  receive  the  truth  irr  the 
love  of  it,  and  are  obedient  thereunto,  we  have  the  pro^ 
mise  that  we  "  shall  not  walk  in  darkness,,  but  g^all  have 
the  light  of  life," 


THE  ORIGINAL    SCRIPTURES   ARE  THE  ONLY   GDRREGT 
STANDARDS. 

I  have  found  much  error  in  our  common  translation ;  the 
margin,  which  generally  contaiBs  the  tetter  reading,  con- 
tradicting the  text.  Adam  Clarke  says,  page  17  of  his* 
Commentary,  that  "  The  marginal  readings  are  essential 
to  ^he  integrity  of  the  text ;"  "  and  they  are  of  so  much 
importance  as  to  be  in  several  instances  preferable  to  the^ 
textual  readings  themselves,"  and  they  "  are  to  be  pre- 
ferred to  those  in  the  text  in  the  proportion  of  at  least 
eight  to  ^ew."  It  is  but  too  obvious  that  sectarian  prej:u- 
dice  has  too  long  prevented  the  eradication  of  many 
manifest  errors,  and  that  a  correct  translation,  while  it 
would  completely  harmonize  with  itself,  would  effectually 
undermine  every  creed  in  Christendom. 

It  is  plain  from  history,  that  our  first  transcribers  and 
translators  were  Romish  priests ,r  who  were  interested  m 
sustaining  the  profitable  corruptions  of  the  separate  exist- 
ence  of  the  soul  in  purgatory,,  and  the  endless  misery  of 
the  wicked.  Every  Enghsh  translation  made  prior  tc? 
the  18th  century,  has  but  too  clearly  copied  from  the 
Vulgate,  and  the  translators  were  not  able,,  as  Macknight 
has  fully  proved^  to  translate  the  whole  Bible  from  the 
original  tongues,  and  the  various  editions  only  profess  to 
be  compared  with  the  original.  King  James,  who  died  a 
Papist,  gave  strict  orders  to  the  translators  of  our  com- 
mon version,  not  to  deviate  widely  from  the  Bishoph 
Bible,  The  following  directions  of  the  King  are  copied 
from  p.  16  of  the  preface  to  Clarke's  Commentary  :. 

1.  "  The  ordinary  Bible  read  in  the  church,  commonly 
called  the  Bishop's  Bible,  to  be  followed,  and  as  little 
altered  as  the  original  will  permit. 

4.  "  When  any  v/ord  hath  divers  significations,  that  t<y 
be  kept  which  hath  beem  most  commonly  used  by  the 
most  eminent  fathers,  being  agreeable  to  the  propriety  o^ 
the  place  J  and  the  analogy  of  faith. 


TRANSLATION  OP  THE  SCRIPTURES.  7 

14.  "  These  translations  to  be  used  when  they  agree 
better  with  the  text  than  the  Bishop's  Bible,  viz. : — Tyn- 
daVs^  Matthew'' s^  Cover  dale's^  Whitchurch,  Geneva^ 

Dr.  Macknight  says,  that  "  Tyndale  and  Coverdale's 
translation,  of  which  the  rest  are  copies,  was  not  made 
from  the  originals,  but  from  the  Vulgate  Latin,^''  It  is 
evident  that  our  authorized  version  was  not  a  new  trans- 
lation from  the  Hebrew  and  Greek ;  but  only  a  revision 
of  certain  editions  of  the  Papal  Vulgate. 

To  the  common  version,  it  is  objected,  1.  That  it  often 
dijffers  from  the  Hebrew  to  follow  the  Septuagint,  and 
the  German  translation  of  the  Septuagint.  2.  That  the 
translators  following  the  Latin  Vulgate,  have  adopted 
many  of  the  original  words,  without  translating  them, 
such  as  hallelujah,  hosanna,  mammon,  anathema,  &c. 
3.  That  by  keeping  too  close  to  the  Hebrew  and  Greek 
idioms,  they  have  rendered  the  version  obscure.  4.  That 
they  were  a  little  too  complaisant  to  the  king,  in  favoring 
his  notions  of  predestination,  election,  witchcraft,  familiar 
spirits,  &c.  These,  it  is  probable,  were  likewise  their 
own  opinions.  5.  That  their  translation  is  partial,  speak- 
ing the  language  of,  and  giving  authority  to,  one  sect, 
(meaning,  probably,  the  Episcopahans.)  6.  That  where 
the  original  words  and  phrases  admitted  of  different 
translations,  the  worse  translations,  by  plurality  of  voices, 
were  put  into  the  text,  and  the  better  were  often  thrown 
out,  or  put  into  the  margin.  7.  That  notwithstanding 
all  the  pains  taken  in  correcting  this  and  the  former 
editions  of  the  English  Bible,  there  still  remain  many 
passages  mistranslated,  either  through  negligence  or 
want  of  knowledge ;  and  to  other  passages,  improper 
additions  were  made,  which  pervert  the  sense.  See  Pre- 
face to  Macknighfs  translation  of  the  E2nstle$,  pages  21 
to  25. 

The  high  encomiums  passed  on  the  authorized  version, 
may  be  due  to  the  simplicity,  elegance,  pathos,  and 
earnestness  of  its  style;  but  certainly  they  do  not  belong 
to  it  for  its  fidelity  to  the  original.  On  the  immortality 
of  the  soul,  the  common  version  is  not  so  faithful  to  the 
original  as  is  the  translation  from  the  Latin  Vulgate, 
sanctioned  by  Bishop  Hughes.  Drs.  Clarke  and  Scott, 
who  speak  most  highly  of  our  translation,  convict  it  of 
more  errors  than  any  other  commentators.     Be  it  always 


8  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

remembered,  that  all  the  transcribers  of  the  manuscripts 
now  in  existence,  and  all  the  translators,  previous  to  King 
James,  with  perhaps  the  only  exceptions  of  Tyndal  and 
Luther,  were  believers  in  the  Popish  doctrine  of  the  im- 
mortality and  separate  conscious  existence  of  the  human 
soul.  There  is  only  one  manuscript,  marked  B.,  the  Cod, 
VaticanuSy  No.  1,209,  in  the  hbrary  of  the  Vatican,  at 
Rome,  that  dates  back  as  early  as  the  4th,  though  proba- 
bly transcribed  in  the  5th  century.  Consequently,  all 
the  ancient  manuscripts  were  transcribed  200  years  after 
the  kindred  doctrines  of  the  immortahty  of  the  soul,  invo 
cation  of  dead  saints,  and  purgatory,  had  become  estab- 
lished in  the  Romish  church,  and  the  manuscripts  being 
scarce,  were  completely  under  the  control  of  the  Popish 
clergy.  The  various  readings  of  manuscripts,  and  differ- 
ing opinions  of  commentators,  prove  them  to  have  been 
fallible,  and  their  creeds  and  traditions  would  naturally 
bias  them  in  their  interpretations  of  the  original  text.  If 
therefore,  we  wish  to  obtain  the  truth,  we  are  of  necessity 
driven  to  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  originals,  as  the  purest 
accessible  fountains. 


TRANSLATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

The  following  ascertained  facts  will  show  the  necessity 
for  a  more  thorough  revision,  or  for  an  entirely  new  trans- 
lation of  the  Scriptures,  to  supplant  King  James's  version. 
The  common  version  at  present  in  use,  was  printed  A.D. 
1611.  The  only  printed  editions  of  the  Oreek  Testament, 
which  were  in  existence  at  that  time  were.  Cardinal 
Ximenes,  printed  in  A.D.  1514,  Erasmus,  1516,  Stephens, 
1546,  and  Beza,  1563,  and  editions  that  were  printed  from 
these.  Nearly  the  same  may  be  said  of  the  O.  T.  The 
authorized  version  was  not  made  from  any  edition  what- 
ever^ uniformly.  It  is  a  somewhat  startling  assertion, 
yet  an  unquestionable  fact,  that  although  we  have  by 
public  authority,  a  Standard  English  Version  of  the  Bible^ 
yet  there  exists  NO  standard  Hebrew  and  Greek  text, 
for  the  Original  of  that  version  !  What  is  called  '^  The 
Received  Text,'^  is  the  text  of  Erasmus,  who  revised  the 
Latin  Vulgate  and  compared  it  with  the  Greek  Text. 
This  edition  was  corrected  by  Stephens,  Beza,  and  Elzivir, 


aTj^ 


TRANSLATION  OP  THE  SCRIPTURI 

and  was  published  byElzivir,  at  Leyden,  in  Holland,  A.D. 
1624 — thatiSj  not  till  thirteen  years  after  the  publication 
of  the  Authorized  Version  I  In  the  compilation  of  his 
Text,  Erasmus  was  only  able  to  consult  eight  recent 
manuscripts,  which  manuscripts  are  now  considered  as 
of  comparatively  shght  authority.  These  manuscripts 
were  those  marked  1,  2,  3,  61,  and  69;  and  the  MSS.  4 
and  7  were  used  in  part  of  his  text,  and  only  one  in  Reve- 
lations, all  of  which  were  written  later  than  the  tenth  cen- 
tury. The  only  manuscript  from  which  he  made  up  his 
Text  for  Revelations,  had  several  chasms,  and  because  the 
last  leaf  was  wanting,  he  translated  the  Latin  of  the 
Vulgate  into  Greek  I  to  supply  these  deficiencies.  See 
March's  Introduction,  vol.  ii.  p.  846,  and  Penn's  Anno- 
tations. Such  is  the  origin  of  the  Received  Text.  In 
these  times  the  Reformation  had  not  made  sufficient 
progress  to  allow  of  the  compilation  of  a  correct  text. 

The  Received  Greek  Text,  though  compiled  from  eight 
comparatively  modern  manuscripts,  is  unsupported  by 
any  one  manuscript,  ancient  or  modern,  and  from  recent 
developments,  is  now  acknowledged  to  be  the  very  worst 
Greek  Text  extant,  in  a  printed  form.  Since  its  publi- 
cation, between  600  and  700  manuscripts  have  been  dis- 
covered, some  of  which  are  very  ancient,  and  very 
valuable.  The  best  is  marked  B,  the  Cod.  Vaticanus,  of 
the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries.  The  second,  marked  A,  the 
Cod.  Alexandrinus,  of  the  fifth  century.  The  third, 
marked  C,'  Cod.  Ephrem,  about  the  fifth  century,  and  the 
fourth,  marked  D,  Cod.  Cantabujiensis,  of  the  seventh 
century.  The  Received  Text  has  not  received  the  benefits 
of  these,  nor  of  the  editions  and  collations  of  Mill,  Wetsteic, 
Matthei,  London  Polyglott,  Bengal,  Griesbach,  Bently, 
Birch,  Knapp,  Lachman,  Scholz,  and  Hahn,  for  the  N. 
T.,  nor  of  many  of  the  most  celebrated  collaters  of  the 
O.  T. 

The  first  translation  of  the  Bible  into  English,  was 
made  by  Wickliffe,  wholly  from  the  Latin  Vulgate,  in 
A.D.  1380.  This  forms  the  basis  of  all  the  Enghsh 
editions.  Tyndale  pubhshed  his  first  edition  in  1525. 
Between  this  and  the  version  of  King  James,  in  1611,  a 
period  of  only  eighty-six  years,  four  successive  revisions 
were  published  by  authority,  as  new  stores  of  manuscripts 
w^ere  discovered  ;  that  is,  one  version  was  made  on  an 


lO  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

average,  every  twenty -two  years.  Although  in  the  241 
years  since  King  James's  revision  was  made,  a  greater 
multitude  of  manuscripts,  of  greater  value  and  authority 
than  any  before  known,  have  been  discovered  and  col- 
lated, yet  no  subsequent  revision  has  been  made  by  autho- 
rity. Still  many  will  fondly  cling  to  the  common  version, 
wdth  all  its  errors  and  corruptions,  and  thereby  help  to 
conceal  the  precious  truths  which  the  providence  of  God 
has  brought  to  light,  and  placed  within  the  reach  of  the 
learned  ;  but  which  are  shamefully  withheld  from  the 
community. 

We  are  aware  that  sectarianism  would  suiSer  consider- 
ably from  a  correct  translation.  But  what  of  that  ? 
The  gain  to  the  cause  of  truth  and  righteousness  would 
gloriously  compensate.  Indeed  it  may  be  set  down  as 
an  axiom,  that  when  the  Scriptures  are  purposely  cor- 
rupted to  sustain  any  doctrine,  that  doctrine  is  presump- 
tively false.  No  lover  of  truth  tries  to  conceal  her  from 
himself  The  "  Bible  Union"  have  convicted  our  trans- 
lation of  twenty  tlwusand  errors  !  some  indeed  of  small 
consequence.  But  the  Scriptures  have  been  purposely 
corrupted^  to  sustain  the  doctrines  of  the  •'  immortality  of 
the  soul,"  "  the  separate  conscious  existence  of  the  spirit 
of  man,"  "  the  eternal  misery  of  the  wicked,"  &c.,  as  we 
shall  make  abundantly  manifest  in  the  forthcoming  pages. 
Sometimes  whole  stories  have  been  introduced,  probably, 
in  the  opinion  of  the  transcribers,  to  embellish.  Such 
are, — The  woman  taken  in  adultery;  The  descent  of  the 
angel  to  trouble  the  waters  of  Bethesda ;  The  bloody 
sweat  of  our  Saviour,  and  the  angel  strengthening  him  ; 
and  The  conversion  of  the  dying  thief  upon  the  cross  ; 
all  of  which  are  supposed  to  be  spurious.  But,  perhaps, 
the  worst  of  all  these  corruptions,  is  the  transposition 
and  omission  of  clauses  of  the  verses  in  Mat.  chap.  27,  to 
conceal  the  essential  fact,  that  Christ  was  truly  slain  by 
his  enemies.  The  reading  of  the  best  manuscripts  is, 
50  V.  :  "  They  offered  him  vinegar :  but  another  going  to 
him,  pierced  his  side  with  a  spear  ;  and  Jesus  crying  with 
a  loud  voice,  expired."  This  passage  of  the  piercing  of 
Christ,  j^Wor  to  his  deaths  was  condemned,  as  late  as  the 
fourteenth  century^  by  Popes  Clement  V.^  and  his  suc- 
cessor, John,  because  it  conflicted  with  some  of  their 
potions  respecting  the  Trinity.     This  shameful  perversion 


MEANING  OP  OmaiNAL  TERMS.  U 

is  sufficient  alone  to  condema  every  edition  in  which 
it  is  contained. 

Seemingly  the  best  course  now  to  be  pursued,  would 
be  to  ad-opt  the  principle  of  criticism  recommended  by 
Dr.  Johnson,  "  For  restoring  the  correct  text  of  all  an- 
cient writings^  whether  profane  or  sacred^  "  Take  the 
w^ost  ancient  copy  for  the  standard  \  to  correct  by  autho- 
rity, wherever  it  can  be  found  ;  and  to  resort  to  conjec- 
ture, only  where  authority  is  absolutely  and  altogether 
wanting ;  observing  always  to  bold  a  most  rigid  medium 
between  presumption  and  timidity,  by  the  former  of 
which,  we  induce  error  upon  truth,  and  by  the  latter,  we 
eonsent  to  remain  forever  und^  the  dominion  of  error, 
and  in  the  power  of  chance,  ignorance,  or  artifice," 

This  is  the  principle  that  has  been  adopted  by  Penn, 
in  his  revision  of"  The  New  Covenant"  He  has  chosen 
the  entire  text  of  the  most  ancient  surviving  manuscript, 
and  which  is  likewise  the  most  free  from  those  interhnea- 
tions  and  alterations,  that  disfigure  and  render  suspicious, 
other  manuscripts  :  This  one  is  the  Codex  VaticanuSj  or 
celebrated  Vatican  MS.  noted  1209  in  the  Vatican  cata- 
logue at  Rome,  and  marked  B,  by  Wetstein,  making  it 
the  basis  and  substsaice  of  his  revision.  a  ^^ 

MEANING  OF  THE  ORIGINAL  TERMS  RENDERED  ioTTL  AND 
SPIRIT.  V 

Assisted  by  an  honest  and  learned  friend  of  the  Inde- 
pendent Congregational  Society,  we  have  traced  all  the 
original  terms  translated  mul^  spirit^  life^  breathy  hell^ 
grave^  and  others,  throughout  the  whole  Bible,  so  that 
any  person  may  readily  perceive  their  Bible  definitions. 

The  Hebrew  word,  nephesh^  of  the  Old  Testament, 
occurs  about  seven  hundred  times,  and  is  rendered  sovl 
four  hundred  and  seventy-one  times  ;  life  and  living^ 
about  one  hundred  and  fifty  times ;  and  the  same  word 
is  also  rendered  a  man^  a  person^  self  they^  me^  him^  any 
one^  breathy  hearty  mind^  appetite^  the  body  (dead  or  alive,) 
lust^  creature^  and  even  a  beast  ;  for  it  is  twenty-eight 
times  applied  to  beasts^  and  to  every  creeping  thing. 

The  Greek  word  psitche^  of  the  New  Testament,  cor- 
responds with  the  word  nephesh  of  the  Old.  It  occurs 
ono  hundred  and  five  times,  and  is  rendered  sgid  fifty-nino 


12  BIBLE  VS,  TRABITIOK. 

times,  and  life  forty  times.  The  same  word  is  also  ren- 
dered mind^  tiSy  you.,  hearty  heartily^  and  is  twice  applied 
to  the  beasts  that  perish.  PsuchikoSy  an  adjective  derived 
from  psuche^  occurs  six  times,  and  is  translated  natural 
and  sensual  ;  it  is  properly  translated  animal  in  modern 
translations.  1  Cor.  1 5 :  44,  will  bear  this  translation.  It 
is  sown  soma  psuchikon^  a  50i^/-body,  or  an  animaZ-body, 
it  is  raised  a  spiritual  body.  There  is  soma  psuchikon^  a 
sow/-body,  or  animal-hodjy  and  there  is  a  spiritual  body. 
45th  ver.  And  so  it  is  written,  (Gen.  2.  7,)  The  first 
man,  Adam,  was  made  into  psuchen  zosan,  a  living  souly 
the  last  Adam  into  a  life-giving  spirit.  46th  ver.  How* 
beit  the  spiritual  ivas  not  the  first  thing ,  but  iYiQ  psuchikon^ 
animal^  or  502^^-man,  and  afterwards  the  spiritual  man. 
Thus  we  see  that  the  adjective  joswc^zX'o/z  always  indicates 
mortality  and  corruption,  and  designates  the  animal  na- 
ture, or  soul  nature  of  man,  in  contradistinction  to  the 
spiritual  nature,  or  incorruptible  nature,  which  the 
Christian  will  receive  at  the  period  of  his  resurrection 
from  the  dead. 

The  word  ruah,  in  Hebrew,  corresponds  with  pneuma 
in  the  Greek.  These  words  are  mostly  rendered  spirit  ; 
but  are  likewise  rendered  wind^  air^  breathy  life^  mindj 
disposition^  &c.,  and  are  sometimes  applied  to  the  beasts. 
But  it  cannot  be  proved  that  either  of  the  terms  mean 
a  ghost^  or  abstract  conscious  spirit,  in  either  man  or 
beast. 

If  any  theologian,  fearing  that  the  craft  is  in  danger, 
by  which  he  obtains  his  wealth,  should  venture  to  deny 
the  truth  manifested  in  these  pages,  he  must  likewise 
deny  the  truth  of  the  Bible.  And  to  defeat  this  work 
by  arguments  drawn  from  the  Bible,  he  would  be  required 
to  produce  as  many  pointed  texts  opposed  to  our  views, 
as  we  have  produced ;  and  likewise  to  show  that  the 
thousands  of  texts  here  produced  are  to  be  interpreted  as 
contrary  to  their  plain  and  obvious  import,  as  the  dead 
body  of  man  is  contrary  to  the  immortal  soul  or  ghost  of 
a  man ;  for  the  words  w.eth  nephesh^  dead  soul,  occur 
eleven  times,  and  are  four  times  translated  dead  body^ 
although  twice  the  word  soul  is  put  into  the  margin, 
(Numb.  19:  11  ;  6:  6,)  but  in  the  other  places  no  intima- 
tion is  given  that  the  original  words  meth  nephesh,  dead 
souls,  is  improperly  rendered.     We  give  a  few  examples, 


MEANING  OF  ORIGINAL  TERMS.  13 

Numb.  xix.  16.  And  whosoever  toucheth  one  that  is 
slain  with  the  sword  in  the  open  field,  or  a  meth  nephesh^ 
dead  soul^  or  a  bone  of  a  nepheshy  soul,  or  a  grave,  shall 
be  unclean  seven  days.  2  Ohron.  20:  24.  Behold,  they 
were  meth  nephesh,  dead  souls,  fallen  to  the  earth.  25th 
ver.  They  found  among  them  in  abundance  both  riches, 
with  the  meth  nephesh,  dead  souls,  and  precious  jewels. 
Ps.  79:  2.  The  meth  nephesh,  dead  souls,  of  thy  ser- 
vants have  they  given  to  be  meat  unto  the  fowls  of  the 
heavens.  See  also,  Ps.  110:  6  ;  Lev.  21:  11  ;  Numb.  6: 
6;  9:  10;   19:  16;  Hag.  2.  13. 

Thus,  then,  the  fabled  immortal  souls  have  bones,  and 
are  slain  with  the  sword.  These  plain  texts  must  not  be 
set  aside  by  incorrect  inferences  drawn  from  a  few  texts 
which  have  been  forced  into  the  service  of  our  opponents. 
Let  us  have  scripture  argument,  for  we  shall  treat  human 
wisdom  and  invention  as  unworthy  of  notice.  Al- 
though, in  this  discussion,  w^e  shall  now  and  then  be 
compelled  to  use  plain  and  severe  language  to  dishonest 
priests,  who  will  neither  acknowledge  the  truth,  nor  per- 
mit others  to  judge  for  themselves  ;  yet  we  do  not  design 
to  treat  unkindly  the  honest  and  the  hberal,  and  especially 
do  we  desire  to  avoid  anything  that  has  the  slightest 
tendency  to  deter  the  sincere  inquirers  after  truth. 

In  the  forth-coming  pages  we  shall  unfold  the  truths  of 
the  Bible,  relating  to  the  nature  and  destiny  of  man, 
expose  the  pious  frauds  and  forgeries  of  theologians,  and 
manifest  their  numerous  and  glaring  absurdities.  And, 
First,  we  shall  prove  from  the  Bible,  the  corporeal  being 
and  mortality  of  the  soul,  and  the  nature  of  the  spirit  of 
man  ;  which  spirit,  not  being  a  living  entity,  is  neither 
mortal  nor  immortal.  And,  Second,  we  shall  prove  that 
the  hell  of  the  Bible  imports  the  utter  extermination  of 
the  wicked  cast  therein,  the  deprivation  of  their  life  and 
being. 


14 


CHAPTER  IL 


PROOF  FROM  THE  BIBLE  OF  THE  CORPOREAL  NATURE  AND 
MORTALITY  OF  THE  SOUL  OF  MAN,  AND  THE  NATURE  OF 
HIS    SPIRIT, 

"  I  will  not  contend  forever,  neither  will  I  be  always 
wroth  :  for  the  spirit  should  fail  before  me,  and  the  souls 
which  I  have  made."   Isa.  57:  16. 

In  tracing  the  word  soul  through  the  authorized  ver- 
sion of  the  Bible,  we  find  it  occurs  five  hundred  and 
thirty  two  times — four  hundred  and  seventy-six  times  in 
the  Old  Testament,  and  fifty-six  times  in  the  New.  God 
is  represented  as  having  a  soul  sixteen  times.  "  Your 
new  moons  and  appointed  feasts  my  soul  hateth."  Isa.  1  : 
14  ;  Lev.  26:  11,  30  ;  Judges  10  :  16  :  Job  23  :  13  ;  Ps. 
11:  5;  Isa.  42:  1  ;  Jer.  5^:9,  29;  6:  8;  9:9;  12:  7; 
14;  19;  32 :  41  ;  Zech.  11  :  8;  and  Heb.  10:  38. 

The  word  soul  occurs  five  times  in  King  James's  ver- 
sion of  the  Old  Testament,  where  nephesh  is  not  the 
original  term ;  for  the  word  nedivothee^  which  the  margin 
calls  darling  J  is  rendered  soul  in  Job  30  :  15  :  it  probably 
means  munificence  ;  and  in  2  Saml.  13  :  39,  and  Ps.  16  : 
2,  the  word  soul  is  added  by  the  translators,  there  being 
no  corresponding  word  in  the  Hebrew  Text. 

The  word  neshomoh^  or  nesme^  is  once  rendered  soul^ 
in  Isa.  57 :  16,  the  text  we  have  chosen  for  our  motto. 
Taylor,  in  his  Hebrew  Concordance,  says,  that  *'  neshomohj 
or  nesme,  signifies  the  chameleon,  a  kind  of  lizard,  which 
has  its  mouth  always  open,  gaping  for  the  air,  on  which 
it  was  once  supposed  to  live.  Nesme  is  rendered  breathy 
spirit  J  and  life^ 


MEANING  OF  ORIGINAL  TERMS.  15 

It  is  rendered  breath  and  spirit  in  the  following  texts, 
and  expresses  the  idea  of  natural  life^  whether  in  man 
or  beast.  Gen.2:  7;  7i22;  Deut.20:  16;  Jos.  11:  11, 
14;  1  Kings  15:  23;  17:17;  Ps.  150  :  6  ;  Isa.  2  :  22  ; 
42 :  5. 

But  nesme  cannot  ever  mean  an  abstract  intelligence, 
or  soul,  or  spirit ;  for  it  would  be  absurd  to  translate 
Josh.  11  :  11,  There  was  not  any  (nephesh)  soul^  left  to 
(nesme,  to  soul,  instead  of  to)  breathe.  Here  nesme  un- 
doubtedly means  breathe,  and  is  so  rendered.  And  in 
every  other  place  where  it  occurs,  it  either  means  breath, 
or  a  breather,  or  life  sustained  by  means  of  breathing  the 
breath  of  lives  ;  that  is,  it  signifies  the  chameleon  or  any 
other  creature  that  lives  by  breathing.  Our  motto,  then, 
should  be  understood  thus,  "  lest  the  (ruah)  spirit,  or 
living  creature,  should  fail  before  me,  and  the  nesme, 
breather,  that  I  have  made."  And  so  in  Ps.  150:6; 
"  Let  every  nesme,  breather,  praise  the  Lord."  We 
conclude,  therefore,  that  nesme  nowhere  means  soul  inde- 
pendently of  our  bodily  organization. 

Nephesh  is  rendered  soul  four  hundred  and  fifty-four 
times  ;  and  psuche  is  so  rendered  fifty-seven  times,  mak- 
ing  five  hundred  and  eleven  times  that  nephesh  and 
psuche  are  rendered  soul,  when  applied  to  man ;  and 
seventeen  times  in  the  original  we  find  these  terms  applied 
to  beasts.  There  are  more  than  three  hundred  other 
places  where  the  same  terms  are  rendered  life,  person,  or 
body,  &c.  ;  for,  had  they  been  rendered  soul  in  all  such 
places,  then  the  reader  must  have  perceived  that  the 
word  soul  never  could  mean  a  something  that  could  Uve 
separately  from  the  man  himself,  neither  as  an  "  immortal 
soul,''''  or  "  deathless  spirit."  Parkhurst  says,  that 
"  nejihesh,  as  a  noun,  hath  been  supposed  to  signify  the 
spiritual  part  of  man,  or  what  we  commonly  call  his  soul. 
I  must  confess,"  says  he,  "  that  I  can  find  no  passage 
where  it  hath  undoubtedly  this  meaning." 

We  say  the  true  meaning  of  soul  is,  a  creature  that 
lives  by  breathing  ;  and  as  the  essential  endowment  of 
such  a  creature  is  life,  so  life  will  stand  often  as  a  correct 
meaning  of  soul.  When  soul  is  applied  to  man,  it  may 
be  translated  life,  soul,  man,  you,  yourself,  person,  my- 
self, thyself,  &c.,  according  to  the  text. 

But  some  of  our  translators,  more  honest  than  the  rest, 


16  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

have  ventured,  in  a  number  of  these  places,  to  insert  th<? 
true  word,  soul,  in  the  margin  ;  but  none  of  them  were 
honest  enough  to  give  us  the  word  soul  in  every  place 
where  nephesh  and  j^952/cAe  occur.  We  shall  endeavor  to 
supply  their  deficiency. 

In  pursuing  this  subject  we  shall  give  the  Bible  answer 
to  the  following  questions  : — 

1.  Is  the  soul  as  great  as  theologians  assume  it  to  be? 

2.  What  is  a  soul  ? 

3.  Is  the  soul  immortal  so  that  it  cannot  fail^  or  cease 
to  exist  as  a  living  being  befm-e  God  ? 

4.  What  is  a  spirit  ? 

5.  Is  the  spirit  immortal ,  so  that  it  cannot  cease  to  ani- 
mate the  man  ? 

6.  We  shall  slww  that  every  text  in  the  Bible  will  harmo- 
nize with  our  answers  ;  even  the  very  texts  from  which  a 
contrary  inference  has  been  erroneously  drawn. 

Our  motto  most  certainly  imphelj,  that  if  God  were  to 
contend  forever,  or  to  be  always  wroth,  that  the  spirits 
and  souls  of  men  w^ould  fail,  die,  or  cease  to  exist  as  living 
beings  before  him.  But  waiving  this,  we  proceed  to  an- 
swer the  j&rst  question : 

1 .    Is  THE  SOUL  AS   GREAT   AS  THEOLOGIANS  ASSUME  IT  TO  BE  ? 

To  this  question  we  give  an  unquaiified  negative.  For, 
1st.  The  ward  soul  when  applied  to  man,  does  not  mean 
a  ghost  or  independent  entity.  Because  man  and  beast 
would  in  this  respect  be  on  a  level  with  God.  For  if  a 
man's  soul  is  a  ghost,  or  spirit,  because  the  soul  of  God 
is  a  ghost  or  spirit,  as  Luther  Lee  argues,  then  we  say 
that  a  beast's  soul  is  a  ghost  also.  Now,  allowing  beasts 
to  possess  souls,  as  Mr.  Lee  admits^  then  upon  this  rea- 
soning, surely  all  are  up  to  a  level  with  God,  as  all  have 
souls  :  "  For  in  his  hand  is  the  soul  of  every  living  crea- 
ture, and  the  breath  of  all  mankind."  Job  12  :  10, 

Again,  if  a  man's  soul  is  a  ghost,  because  it  goes  by  the 
same  name  as  the  soul  of  God,  then,  not  only  beasts  and 
every  creeping  thing  being  souls,  are  ghosts  ;  and  then, 
too,  the  soul  of  sheol  (the  grave,  or  death,)  is  likewise  a 
ghost,  because  it  goes  by  the  same  name,  Isa.  5  :  14, 
"  Therefore  sheol,  (the  state  of  death,  or  grave,)  hath  en- 
larged her  nephesh,  (soul  or  being,)  and  opened  her  mouth 


THE   SOUL   NOT   A   GHOST.  17 

without  measure."  The  same  reasoning  would  show  that 
man  himself,  as  existing  in  this  hfe,  is  a  ghosty  for  God  is 
called  a  man,  Exo.  15  :  3,  "  The  Lord  is  a  man  of  war." 
The  same  principle  of  false  reasoning  would  convert  a 
man's  heart  and  eyes,  as  well  as  the  heart  and  eyes  of 
beasts  into  so  many  ghosts,  for  they  are  called  by  the 
same  name  as  the  eyes  and  heart,  hands,  and  feet  of  God. 
And  a  tree  must  have  sense  and  feeling,  because  it  is  said 
to  have  life  as  well  as  men.  But  what  sort  of  theology 
is  this  ?  Cannot  God  possess  an  attribute  that  may  be 
entirely  spiritual,  yet  called  by  the  same  name  as  one  in 
man  that  may  be  entirely  corporeal  ?  If  he  cannot,  then 
how  shall  he  be  able,  out  of  these  stones,  to  raise  up 
children  unto  Abraham  ?  Matt.  3  :  9.  Surely  the  souls 
of  these  children  would  be  corporeal,  if  made  out  of  stones. 

Again,  God's  sotfl  cannot  be  separated  from  himself; 
for  if  it  can,  then  is  he  two  Gods,  "  But  to  us  there  is 
but  one  God."  I  Cor.  8  :  6.  Allow  God's  soul  to  be /iim- 
self  as  nephesh  when  applied  to  God,  is  twice  translated. 
Jer.  51  :  14,  •"'  The  Lord  of  hosts  hath  sworn  by  his  ne- 
pheshj^^  (by  himself).  Also  in  Amos  6:8;  or  him,  as  in 
Pro.  6  :  16.  "  These  six  things  doth  the  Lord  hate,  yea, 
seven  are  an  abomination  of  his  (nephesh^)  of  him  ;"  and 
we  obtain  the  correct  idea.  As  nephesh^  the  soul,  com- 
prehends the  whole  being  of  God,  so  does  the  same  term 
comprehend  the  whole  being  of  man  ;  and  never  means  a 
principle  that  can  live  independently  of  the  man  or  beast, 
to  both  of  which  the  term  nephesh  is  indiscriminately  ap- 
plied ;  and  is  twenty -five  times  correctly  translated  "  them- 
selves." Let  two  examples  suffice  for  the  present.  "  He 
teareth  (his  nephesh)  himself  in  his  anger."  Job  18:4.  Did 
Job  tear  his  immaterial  and  immortal  ghost  ?  ''  Back- 
sliding Israel  hath  justified  herself,  (her  nephesh)  more 
than  treacherous  Judah."  Jer.  3:11.  Has  a  nation  a 
ghost  ? 

Nay,  but  every  nation  has  a  being.  Here,  then,  the 
arguments  of  Luther  Lee,  and  those  of  like  ("^^receows.?") 
faith,  are  overthrown  by  the  translators  themselves,  though 
they  were  believers  in  the  immortal-soul  theory.  It  is 
vain  to  endeavor  to  array  the  soul,  which  is  the  man  him- 
self, with  the  attributes  of  independent  conscious  existence, 
spirituality,  immateriality,  and  immortality,  against  the 
plainest  declarations  of  God's  Word. 


18  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

2dly.  The  soul  of  man  is  no  part  of  God,  Because  if 
every  soul  is  a  part  of  God,  or  of  the  essence  of 
Deity,  as  some  theologians  contend,  then  God  is  not  one 
and  indivisible,  but  is  a  multitude,  and  these  multiplied 
millions  of  parts  sin  and  die.  "  For  the  soul  that  sinneth 
IT  shall  die."  And  if  so  many  parts  of  God  sin,  then 
these  sinning  parts  are  opposed  to  the  other  parts  of  him  ; 
and  thus  this  absurd  theory  divides  God  against  himself; 
"  How  then  shall  his  kingdom  stand  ?" 

Again,  as  the  soul  is  sometimes  unhappy,  it  would  fol- 
low upon  this  theory,  that  God  is  sometimes  unhappy. 
And  if  the  dogma  of  the  endless  misery  of  the  wicked 
were  true,  then  millions  of  parts  of  God  would  be  tormen- 
ted for  ever ;  and,  as  some  theologians  represent,  these 
souls  of  the  wicked,  as  parts  of  God,  will  be  eternally 
cursing  the  other  parts  of  God ! ! !  unless  these  wicked 
shall  c«ase  to  become  parts  of  God.  But  if  so  many  parts 
of  God  can  be  annihilated,  or  converted  into  that  which 
is  not  a  part  of  God,  then  when  God  swore  by  himself — 
"  As  I  live,"  the  stability  of  his  oath  is  overturned,  be- 
cause if  one  part  of  God  may  die,  all  may  die ! !  Into 
such  absurdities  does  this  vain  philosophy  lead  its  profes- 
sors. 

Again,  it  is  presumed  that  all  will  admit,  that  God,  and 
all  that  constitutes  his  being,  is  uncreated^  for  he  did  not 
create  himself,  and  there  was  none  before  him  to  create. 
If  any  part  of  God  was  created,  then  that  part  had  a  be- 
ginning, and  is  not  eternal.  But  man,  soul  and  spirit, 
was  created,  "  as  the  Lord  liveth  that  made  us  this  soul." 
Jer.  38:  16.  '^  Lo,  he  that  formeth  the  mountains  and 
createth  the  spirit"  {ruah).  Am.  4:  13.  ''The  Lord 
which  formeth  the  spirit  {ruah)  of  man  that  is  in  him." 
Zech.  12  :  1.  The  last  two  examples,  refer  to  the  ruah^ 
as  the  principle  of  life.  As  soul  and  spirit  were  created 
and  had  a  beginning,  therefore  they  are  not  parts  of  an 
uncreated  and  eternal  God. 

Again,  the  soul  is  not  only  created,  but  created  of  the 
dust ;  for  the  same  man  that  is  called  a  living  soul  was 
made  of  the  dust  of  the  ground  :  "  And  God  said,  dust 
thou  art,  and  unto  dust  shalt  thou  return."  Gen.  3:19. 
And  Paul  says,  that  the  same  living  soul  is  of  the  earth, 
earthy.  1  Cor.  15:47.  Words  cannot  make  it  more  plain 
than  do  these  texts,  that  the  whole  man  is  a  soul,  and  is 


THE  SOtTL   IS    OF  THE  BUST,  19 

corporeal.  But  should  any  contend  that  the  name  "  man," 
does  not  include  the  80ul,  and  insist  that  the  soul  was  a 
eoraething  added  to  man,  by  the  breath  that  was  breathed 
into  his  nostrils,  then  man  w  only  a  body,  and  his  body 
became  a  living  soul.  And  this  is  true,  for  the  creature, 
man,  or  body,  or  soul,  that  was  made  of  the  dust  of  the 
earth,  and  was  hfeless,  by  the  simple  inspiration  of  the 
breath  of  lives,  that  is,  of  all  lives,  became  a  living  soul. 
For  the  lifeless  soul  made  of  dust,  became  a  living  soul  or 
creature.  See  Job's  account  of  this  matter,  10:  8-12, 
how  God  made  him  or  his  soul. 

8.  "  Thy  hands  have  bound  me,  (or  my  soul,)  and 
formed  me  altogether,  joining  me  together  on  every  side, 
thou  didst  also  finish  me. 

9.  Eemember,  I  beseech  thee,  as  clay  didst  thou  form 
me  ;  and  wilt  thou  return  me  to  dust  ? 

10.  AVas  it  not  as  milk  thou  pourest  me  out,  and  as  a 
cheese  concreted  me  together  ? 

11.  With  skin  and  flesh  thou  didst  clothe  me,  and  in- 
terwoven me  with  bones  and  sinews, 

1 2.  Life  and  sensation  thou  didst  produce  in  me,  and 
thy  superintending  care  hath  preserved  my  breath:'*'* — 
Frij. 

Here  the  same  *'  /we^,"  that  is  clothed  with  flesh  and 
skin,  and  platted  together  with  bones  and  sinews,  and  re- 
ceives life  and  the  conscious  faculty  from  the  Lord,  is  the 
same  "  wc,"  that  was  moulded  as  the  clay,  and  must  be 
brought  into  dust  again.  Life  and  sensation  are  here 
made  to  depend  upon  the  pi-eservation  of  his  breath,  and 
to  preserve  his  breath  is  equivalent  to  the  preservation  of 
his  life  and  consciousness.  So  Dan.  5:13,"  God  in  whose 
hand  thy  breath  is,  and  whose  are  all  thy  ways  ;"  and 
Paul,  Acts  17  :  28,  "  In  him  we  live,  and  move,  and  have 
our  being."  For  "  No  man  hath  power  to  retain  the 
spirit"  of  the  breath  of  lives.  "  Man  does  not  live  by 
bread  alone;"  and,  if  "  God  gather  unto  himself  his  spirit 
and  his  breath,"  then  ^'' man  shall  turn  again  unto  dust;" 
and  "his  thoughts  perish."  Job  34:  14,  15;  and  Psal. 
146 :  4.  So  in  Job  30 :  23.  "  For  I  know  that  thou  wilt 
bring  me  to  death,  and  to  the  house  appointed  for  all  the 
living."  Job  says  that  "  me,"  (himself,)  should  be  brought 
to  the  sepulchre.  If  the  soul  does  not  enter  there,  then 
the  soul  does  not  live,  or  the  house  is  not  appointed  for 


5iO  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION.    ' 

nil  the  living.  In  the  first  version  of  the  Scriptures,  the 
8yriac,  the  sepulchre  is  called  the  "  home  of  the  dead." 
Theologians  tell  us  that  it  is  the  soul  that  seeks  God,  and 
that  follows  after  righteousness.  Very  well.  Read  then 
Isa.  51  :  1,  2.  '^Hearken  to  me,  ye  that  follow  after 
righteousness,  ye  that  seek  the  Lord  ;  look  unto  the  rock 
whence  ye  are  hewn^  and  to  the  hole  of  the  pit  whence 
ye  fire  digged.  Look  unto  Abraham  your  father,  and 
unto  Sarah  that  bare  you."  The  holiest  part  of  the  Chris- 
tian then  proceeds  from  the  earth,  and  is  bom  of  earthly 
parents.  Abraham  sets  his  seal  to  this  truth,  for  he  says, 
Gen.  18:  27,  ''I  am  but  dust  and  ashes."  If  Abraham 
w^as  an  immortal  soul,  with  the  exception  of  a  thin,  out- 
side shell — the  body,  how  could  he  say  that  he  was  but 
dust  and  ashes ;  nay,  he  could  not  have  said  that  he  was 
an  immortal  ghost,  while  any  part  of  him  was  dust.  Ps. 
78  :  39,  (God)  ''  remembered  that  they  were  but^es^;  a 
wind  that  passeth  away."  But  if  a  part  of  man  was  a 
ghost  or  spirit,  would  not  God  have  remembered  that 
they  were  but  part  flesh,  and  that  the  principal  part  of 
them  was  an  immortal  ghost  ?  But  all  of  man  and  of 
beast  are  of  the  dust,  and  all  shall  alike  turn  to  dust 
again.  The  very  highest  nature  that  man  has,  irrespec- 
tive of  Christ  and  the  resurrection,  is  flesh,  an  evanescent 
wind. 

Again,  theologians  tell  us,  that  the  soul  is  the  essential 
part  of  man.  We  say,  it  is  the  man  himself  They  say, 
it  was  created  separately  from  the  body.  If  so,  why  did 
not  Moses,  in  recording  the  history  of  the  creation  of 
man,  give  us  some  account  of  this  matter  ?  And  why 
did  he  exhaust  his  description,  by  giving  us  an  account 
of  the  formation  of  the  body  ?  and  why  call  this  body 
the  man,  even  before  the  Hving  principle,  which  they 
term  the  great  '*  immortal  soul,"  was  imparted  ?  Why 
use  a  phraseology  that  precludes  the  idea  that  any  such 
soul  was  given  ?  Will  our  current  teachers  please  in- 
form us  ? 

Again  :  If  souls  are  a  part  of  God,  or  if  they  are  ira 
material  spirits,  then  they  are  not  begotten  by  their 
fathers,  but  are  separately  originated.  But  yet  the  Bible 
fourteen  times  expressly  declares,  that  "  souls  came  out 
of  the  loins  of  their  fathers,"  and  "  that  they  were  born 
of  their  fathers  in  the  land ;"  not  in  heaven.     Gen.  12:  5, 


SOULS  ARE  BORN — THE  SOUL     IS  NOT  A  SPIRIT.  21 

"  And  Abraham  took  Sarah  his  wife,  and  Lot,  his  bro- 
ther's son,  and  all  their  substance  that  they  had  gathered, 
and  the  souls  that  they  had  gotten  in  Haran^  and  they 
went  forth  to  go  into  the  land  of  Canaan."  That  "  souls 
were  born  in  their  father's  house."  Exodus  12:  19,  and 
Numb.  15:  30.  In  Gen.  46:  18,  "These  are  sons  of 
Zilpah,  and  these  she  bare  unto  Jacob^  even  sixteen  souls^ 
Verse  26,  "  All  the  sotds  that  came  with  Jacob  into 
Egypt,  which  came  out  of  his  loins.'''*  Exo.  1:5,  "  All 
the  souls  that  came  out  of  the  loins  ofJacob^  were  seventy 
souls."  See  also.  Gen.  46:  15,  22,  25,  27-  Now  I  ask, 
did  Abraham,  Lot,  and  Jacob,  beget  these  souls  ?  or,  if 
those  seventy  "  immortal  souls"  came  down  from  heaven, 
how  came  they  in  Jacob's  loins  ?  Say,  rather,  that  Adam 
was  created  with  a  pro-creative  faculty,  and  as  God 
caused  the  "  earth  to  bring  forth  grass  and  herb  yielding 
seed  after  his  kind^  and  the  tree  yielding  fruit  whose  seed 
was  in  itself  after  his  kind,"  so  man  was  made  with  the 
power  to  produce  his  Hke.  Could  these  seventy  souls 
that  came  out  of  the  loins  of  mortal  Jacob,  be  immortal 
ghosts  ?  For  how  can  flesh  beget  spirit  ?  For  "  that 
which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh,"  and  not  spirit,  there- 
fore to  possess  that  spiritual,  incorruptible,  immortal  na- 
ture, the  peculiar  privilege  of  the  righteous  ;  "  Ye  must 
be  born  again,"  of  the  Spirit,  and  by  a  resurrection  from 
the  dead,  or  ye  cannot  inherit  an  everlasting  kingdom. 

Again  :  the  soul  is  not  a  spirit ;  for  soul  and  spirit  are 
separate  things.  1  Thes.  5 :  23,  "  I  pray  God  your 
whole  spirit,  and  soul,  and  body,  (or  your  whole  person,) 
be  preserved  blameless  unto  the  coming  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ."  This  cannot  mean  that  man  has  two 
ghosts.  Perhaps  it  may  mean  your  whole  disposition, 
life,  and  person,  the  whole  compound  nature  of  man,  for 
spirit  sometimes  means  person.  Heb.  4  :  12,  "  The  Word 
of  God,  as  a  sharp  two-edged  sword,  dividing  asunder  soul 
and  spirit ;"  separating  the  soul-like  or  animal  nature  of 
man,  from  his  higher  intellectual  and  moral  qualities. 
See  also  Isa.  57  :  16;  Luke  1  :  46,  47.  1  Cor.  6  :  20, 
"  Glorify  God  in  your  body."  All  the  MSS.  close  the 
paragraph  here.  The  clause,  "  and  in  your  spirits  which 
are  his,"  is  undoubtedly  spurious.  And  1  Thes.  5 :  23, 
may  also  have  been  a  little  amended  by  some  ofl&cious 
copyist. 


22  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION, 

The  word  pstichikos^  an  adjective,  derived  from  pstiche^ 
a  soul,  occurs  six  times.  Strictly  rendered,  it  would  be 
soulical,  or  soul-like,  or  animal  ;  and  is  kindred  to  what 
Paul  designates  the  flesh,  or  animal  nature  of  man,  in  op- 
position to  the  spiritual,  or  higher  moral  and  intellectual 
nature  ;  as  in  Rom.  8 :  5,  "  Now  they  who  live  according 
to  the  flesh,  mind  the  things  of  the  flesh,  and  they  who 
live  according  to  the  spirit,  attend  to  the  things  of  the 
spirit.  For  the  thinking  of  the  flesh  is  (or  produces) 
death,  and  the  thinking  of  the  spirit  is  (or  produces)  life 
and  peace.^'  Here  are  two  thinking  principles  contrasted 
with  each  other — the  animal  or  soul-like  principle,  called 
flesh,  producing,  if  allowed  to  predominate,  death  ;  and 
the  reasonable,  intellectual,  and  moral  principle,  called, 
spirit,  producing,  if  controlling,  life  and  peace. 

In  1  Cor.  2 :  14,  and  15  :  44,  46,  psztchikos^  soul-like, 
soulical,  or  animal,  is  translated  natural ;  but  in  Jude  19, 
and  in  James  3  :  15,  it  is  rendered  sensual.  In  all  these 
places  the  soulical  nature  is  put  in  direct  and  strong  op- 
position to  the  spiritual  nature.  And  the  spiritual  nature, 
be  it  remembered,  does  not  naturally  belong  to  man,  but 
is  superinduced  as  a  subsequent  and  peculiar  develop- 
ment in  the  cases  of  those  who  have  submitted  themselves 
to  Christ.  Of  those  under  the  control  of  the  soulical  na- 
ture, Jude,  verse  19,  says,  *'  These  be  they  who  separate 
themselves  {psuchiJcos),  soulical  men,  or  animal  men,  not 
having  the  Spirit ^  And  James  3  :  15,  "  This  is  not  the 
wisdom  which  cometh  from  above,  but  is  earthly,  {psu- 
chiJcos,)  soulical,  or  animal,  devilish."  Paul  says  of  such, 
1  Cor.  2:  14,  "  Now,  (psu^hikos,)  a  soulical,  or  animal 
man,  receiveth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  for 
they  are  foolishness  to  him  ;  neither  can  he  know  them, 
because  they  are  (pneumatikos)  spiritually  examined;" 
that  is,  they  are  intellectually  and  morally  examined 
So  much  for  the  soul-ghost  invention  !  Theologians  tell 
us  that  the  soul  is  a  spirit  or  ghost,  that  receives  and 
transacts  all  spiritual  matters.  Yet  Christ  says,  "  If  a 
man  hate  not  his  own  (psucke,)  soul,  he  cannot  be  my 
disciple."  Luke  14:26.  All  agreeing  with  Paul's  well- 
known  expression,  "  To  be  carnally-minded  is  death." 

The  mere  possession  of  a  soul  nature,  then,  so  far  from 
implying  superiority,  is  conspicuously  marked  as  the 
lowest  animal  nature,  incapacitating  those  who  possess 


THE  SOUL  NOT  A  SPIRIT.  23 

nothing  more,  from  receiving  or  appreciating  the  higher 
intellectual  and  moral  communications  and  endowments. 
Therefore,  says  Paul,  1  Cor.  3:1,  "  Now  I,  brethren, 
could  not  speak  to  you  as  to  spiritual  (men),  but  as  to 
Heshly  men,  even  as  to  babes  in  Christ."  As  unto  men 
governed  by  your  soulical  or  animal  natures,  and  not  by 
your  intellectual  and  moral.  Nearly  the  whole  of  Paul's 
reasoning,  through  1  Cor.  15,  is  to  show  that  the  soul 
nature  which  we  now  possess,  even  with  the  accompani- 
ments of  spiritual  graces,  altogether  unfits  us  for  inherit- 
ing an  everlasting  kingdom,  and  is  likewise  emphatically 
incompatible  with  the  separate  existence  of  either  soul  or 
spirit;  for  he  affirms,  16  and   18,  "  If  the  dead  are  not 

raised Certainly  also  those  who  have  fallen  asleep 

in  Christ  have  perished."  That  their  hope  has  ended 
with  the  life  they  have  lost.  They  are  utterly  blotted 
out  of  existence  for  the  present  and  all  future  time  ;  for, 
he  argues,  "  If  there  be  no  resurrection  from  the  dead," 
the  dead  in  Christ  Hve  not  now,  nor  will  they  live  in  the 
future.  If  there  be  no  resurrection,  there  is  no  future 
life,  even  for  Christians,  after  this.  He  proceeds  strongly 
to  contrast  the  soulical  nature  of  the  first  Adam  and  his 
descendants,  with  the  spiritual  nature  which  the  second 
Adam  possesses,  subsequent  to  his  resurrection,  and  the 
spiritual  nature  which  his  disciples  will  possess,  who  will 
live  again  through  him,  subsequent  to  their  resurrection. 

The  whole  nature  derived  from  the  first  Adam,  he 
affirms  to  be  corruptible,  mortal,  (psuchikos^)  soulical,  or 
animal  and  earthy.  But  the  nature  to  be  possessed 
afterwards,  by  the  righteous,  at  the  resurrection,  he  con- 
trasts with  this,  and  affirms  of  that  nature,  that  it  will  be 
incorruptible,  immortal,  {pneumatikon,)  spirit-like,  or 
spiritual  and  heavenly. 

It  seems  there  were  some  in  Paul's  days,  who  denied 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  the  fundamental  doctrine  of 
Christianity,  which  rendered  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  his 
death  and  resurrection  of  no  avail,  and  the  sufferings  of 
his  followers  were  likewise  useless ;  their  faith  was  vain, 
their  hope  was  vain.  They  had  predicated  all  upon  a 
resurrection  from  the  dead,  and  the  rewards  and  the 
glory  to  be  then  revealed,  and  these  doubters  denied 
that  it  would  ever  take  place.  But,  alas  !  this  same 
doctrine  is  practically  and  absolutely  denied,  by  all  who 


24  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

believe  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul  !  For  if  the  soul, 
or  essential  man,  does  not  die,  as  modern  theology  affirms, 
how  can  it  be  raised  again  to  hfe  ?  Paul's  language  to 
one  of  these  would  be,  36th  ver.  "  Foolish  man  !  The 
seed  which  thou  sowest,  is  not  ?'e-enlivened,  unless  it  die?'* 
We  will  paraphrase  his  words  from  the  44th  verse. 

The  soma  'psuchikon^  soulical  body,  or  present  animal, 
or  soul  nature  of  the  Christian  is  consigned  to  the  grave ; 
but  he  will  be  raised  again,  soma  pneumatikon^  a  spiritual 
body,  a  real,  tangible,  yet  heavenly  nature,  of  which 
Jesus  Christ  is  the  first-fruits,  being  the  first  who  has 
manifested  this  life,  and  incorruptibility  promised  in  the 
Gospel,  by  rising  again  from  the  dead,  with  a  nature 
that  cannot  now^  be  subject  to  corruption.  This  is  the 
pattern  after  which  we  shall  be  fashioned.  Thus  hath 
Christ  made  death  ineffectual  to  his  followers,  and  hath 
ill  rated  that  life  and  incorruptibility  that  he  requires 
us  .  seek  for.  (2  Tim.  1 :  10  ;  Rom.  2:  7.)  For  there 
is  not  only  a  soma  psuchikon,  a  soulical  nature,  which 
we  at  present  possess,  but  there  will  Hkewise  be  a  soma 
pneumatikon^  a  spiritual  nature,  with  which  Christians 
shall  be  invested  at  the  resurrection.  And  so  also  it  is 
written  in  Genesis  2  :  7,  The  first  man  Adam  was  only 
made  a  psuchen  zosan,  a  living  animal,  or  a  living  soul, 
or  a  living  creature,  for  the  terms  are  synonimous,  and 
therefore  had  nothing  about  him  but  what  was  mortal 
and  corruptible  ;  but  the  second  Adam  was  made  into  a 
pneuma  zdopoioun,  a  life-giving  spirit,  who  will  again  im- 
part life  unto  his  followers,  by  a  resurrection  from  the 
dead,  connected  with  an  incorruptible  or  spiritual  nature, 
not  subject  to  death.  46th  verse.  But  we  do  not  pos- 
sess this  pneu?natikon,  spiritual  nature,  "  at  first,"  or  in 
this  present  state,  but  only  that  which  is  psuchikon^ 
soulical,  or  animal,  and  "  afterwards,"  when  Christians 
are  raised  from  the  dead,  we  shall  put  on  for  the  first 
time,  our  pneumatikon^  spiritual  nature.  The  first  man 
was  wholly  made  of  the  dust  of  the  earth,  and  must, 
therefore,  be  of  an  earthly  nature,  unfitted  for  eternal 
fife,  and  hence  the  necessity  for  the  tree  of  lives  being 
placed  within  his  reach,  that  if  he  maintained  his  inno- 
cence, he  might  have  eaten  of  it  and  hved  for  ever  ;  but 
the  second  man,  the  pattern  of  the  nature  we  Christians 
are  to  possess,  is  the  Lord  from  heaven.  48th  verse.  A3 


PARAPHRASE  QV  1  COR.     15:  44-M.  25 

the  first  man  from  whom  we  have  descended,  was  made 
of  dust,  so  we  possess  no  other  nature  from  the  first 
Adam,  but  an  earthly  nature,  and  those  that  do  not  be- 
Jieve  and  obey  Christ,  will  possess  no  other  nature,  and 
even  if  they  should  be  raised  from  the  dead,  not  having 
the  germ  of  the  spirit  of  Christ,  they  would  not  possess 
this  spiritual  or  incorruptible  nature,  and  would  there- 
fore naturally  die  again,  without  any  positive  infliction  of 
the  judgments  of  God  ;  as  did  the  widow's  son,  the 
nobleman's  daughter,  and  Lazarus,  who  were  only 
restored  to  Adamic,  or  mortal  life.  But  as  the  second 
Adam,  or  the  second  great  head  of  all  who  will  continue 
to  live,  was  from  heaven,  we  Christians,  who  possess  his 
likeness,  a  heavenly,  incorruptible,  and  therefore  an  im- 
mortal nature  at  the  resurrection,  when  Christ,  who  is 
our  life,  shall  appear.  Verse  49.  And,  as  Christians 
have  borne  the  likeness  of  the  earthly  and  mortal  Arlam, 
60,  at  the  resurrection,  shall  Christians  bear  the  lil  '/ess 
of  the  heavenly  man,  Christ  Jesus.  Verse  53.  For  this 
corruptible,  decaying  nature,  which  w^e  now  possess,  and 
which  necessarily  unfits  us  for  an  everlasting  inheritance, 
must  put  on  a  something  we  do  not  at  present  possess  ; 
that  is,  an  incorruptible  body — we  must  put  on  immor- 
tality. Verse  54.  When  this  mortal  nature  shall  have  put 
on  immortality,  the7t,  and  not  till  then,  will  death  be  swal- 
lowed up  in  victory.  The  dominion  of  Death  over  the 
whole  being  of  the  righteous  is  complete ;  they  sleep  in 
unconsciousness  till  the  resurrection.  But  the  ''  gates 
of  hades,"  the  power  of  death  and  the  grave,  will  not 
continue  to  prevail  over  the  church.  For  when  Christ, 
who  is  our  life,  shall  appear,  then  also  will  his  followers 
appear  with  him  in  glory,  and  the  dominion  of  death 
over  the  righteous  will  then  ce^se  forever.  See  also  ver. 
17,  18,  19,  29,  30,  and  32. 

We  have  merely  amplified  the  arguments  of  the 
Apostle.  The  immortal  nature  to  be  derived  from 
Chi'ist,  is  strongly  contrasted  with  the  mortal  nature 
derived  from  Adam.  But  if  all  men  possessed  this  im- 
mortal nature  through  natural  birth,  then  there  is  no 
contrast,  and  the  Apostle's  strong  argument  is  converted 
into  nonsense  !  The  Apostle's  argument  is  plain  enough 
as  it  stands,  without  our  paraphrase,  to  convince  all 
candid   persons   that  man,  in  his  present  state,  is  not 


26  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

immortal ;  nay,  that  there  is  no  principle  of  immortality, 
or  perpetual  conscious  existence  naturally,  inherent  in 
him.  Can  a  soul  that  is  now  immortal  put  on,  for  the 
first  time,  at  a  future  period,  immortality  ?  Paul  says, 
1  Tim.  6  :  16,  I'  God  only  hath  immortality,"  and,  conse- 
quently, no  other  being  but  God  is  naturally  immortal. 

The  word  apsuchoSy  without  a  soul,  that  is  something 
not  intended  to  live  by  breathing,  occurs  once,  in  I  Cor. 
14:7,  translated  without  life,  "  things  without  life,  giv- 
ing sound."  The  w^ord  soul  is  likewise  applied  thirty 
times  to  beasts,  creeping  things,  and  fish. 

We  therefore  conclude,  that  the  soul  and  spirit  are 
not  identical,  but  two  things — as  much  so  as  body  and 
breath  are  two  things ;  and  that  the  soul  of  man  is  not 
what  modern  philosophy  assumes  it  to  be,  but  is  the 
man  himself,  a  mere  mortal  creature. 

THE  SOUL  IS  NOT  A    LIVING    THING   INDEPENDENTLY    OF    THE 
BODY. 

We  now  quote  a  few  Scriptures  to  prove  that  the 
man,  or  his  body,  actuates  the  soul,  which  could  never 
occur  if  the  soul  were  an  independent  ghost,  and  the 
body  only  one  of  many  modes  by  which  the  soul  could 
manifest  hfe.  Deut.  4:9,  "  Only  take  heed  to  thyself, 
and  keep  thy  soul  diligently.  Beut.  24  :  15,  "  For  he  is 
poor,  and  Ufteth  his  {nephesh)  soul  unto  it."  Jer.  44 : 
14,  "  That  they  should  return  into  the  land  of  Judab,  to 
which  they  hft  up  their  (nephesh)  soul."  Ez.  24 :  25, 
"  The  desire  of  their  eyes,  the  lifting  up  of  their  [nephesh) 
soul."  Hosea  ,4  :  8,  "  They  lift  up  their  (nephesh)  soul 
to  their  iniquity."  In  these  places,  nephesh  is  rendered 
heart,  desire,  or  mind.  It  is  the  man  that  lifts  up  or 
controls  the  nephesh,  or  soul,  and  the  soul  does  not  con- 
trol the  man.  In  Ps.  24 :  4  ;  25  :  1 ;  86 :  4 ;  143  :  8, 
David  lifts  up  his  soul  to  God.  But  he  presented  not 
his  ghost,  but  himself,  to  God,  to  be  protected  and 
blessed.  In  Daniel  5  :  23,  "  But  hast  lifted  up  thyself 
against  the  Lord  of  heaven."  Ezek.  31 :  10,  "  Because 
thou  hast  lifted  up  thyself  in  height."  Here,  and  in 
many  other  places,  thyself  is  used,  instead  of  thy  soul. 
Then  soul  and  self  mean  the  same  thing.  When  Ahi- 
thophel  and  Judas  hung  themselves,  we  suspect  some- 


THE   SOUL   IS  NOT  THE   MtND.  27 

thing  more  than  ghosts  were  hung.  Luke  12 :  4,  "Be 
not  afraid  of  them  that  kill  the  body."  Then  the  body 
itself  Uves.  And  thus  we  read  of  living,  dead,  or  mortal 
bodies.  How  can  the  body  be  said  to  die,  if  it  never 
lives  ?  To  affirm  that  the  soul  is  the  essential  man,  and 
never  dies,  and  yet  to  use  the  phrase  a  dead  man,  is  a 
glaring  absurdity.  Deceived  man  argues  that  the  soul, 
considered  as  an  independent,  ever  living  thing,  is  the 
hfe  of  the  flesh ;  but  God  has  eight  times  said,  the 
"  blood"  is  the  life  of  the  flesh  ;  and  once,  that  a  "  sound 
heart"  is  the  life  of  the  flesh.  Pro  v.  14  :  30. 

Life,  in  the  abstract,  cannot  be  called  the  soul,  or  a 
ghost.  Let  the  word  life  be  substituted  for  soul  in  the 
following  texts — Job  3  :  20,  Wherefore  is  light  given  to 
him  that  is  in  misery,  and  soul  unto  the  bitter  in  soul. 
Ch.  7:15,  My  soul  chooseth  strangling,  and  death  rather 
than  my  soul.  Ps.  66  :  9,  Which  holdeth  our  soul  in 
souL  Prov.  3  :  22,  So  shall  they  be  soul  unto  thy  soul. 
Jer.  52  :  33,  He  did  continually  eat  bread  before  him  all 
the  days  of  his  soul.  Those  who  choose  to  follow  this 
further  may  try  the  following  texts — Job  10  :  1 ;  24 :  22  ; 
Ps.  66  :  9 ;  Isa.  38 :  12 ;  Lam.  3  :  53  ;  Eom.  11  :  15  ;  1 
John  5 :  12;  Gen.  23  :  1  ;  Judges  16  :  30  :  Luke  21 :  31 : 
John  6  :  53  ;  Ps.  21  :  4. 

But  the  terms  indicating  life,  such  as  alive^  living, 
liveth,  &c.,  occur  950  times ;  and  yet  forty  places  cannot 
be  found  among  them,  where  it  would  not  be  manifestly 
absurd  to  call  them  either  soul  or  ghost.  The  word 
heart  occurs  970  times,  which  sometimes  indicate  life. 

THE  SOUL  IS  NOT  THE  MIND. 

There  are  but  few  places  where  it  would  not  be  ab- 
surd to  call  the  mind  the  soul,  and  more  absurd  to  call 
it  a  ghost.  Deut.  30:  1,  The  blessing  and  the  curse 
which  I  have  set  before  thee,  thou  shalt  call  them  to 
soul.  Gen.  23 :  8,  If  it  be  your  soul  that  I  should  bury 
my  dead  out  of  my  sight.  Isa.  46  :  8,  Bring  it  again  to 
soul^  O  ye  transgressors.  Ps.  31 :  12,  I  am  forgotten  as 
a  dead  man  out  of  soul.  Jer.  51:  50,  Let  Jerusalem  come 
into  your  soul.  Acts  28  :  6,  They  changed  their  souls ^ 
and  said  that  he  was  a  god.  Gol.  2:18,  Vainly  puffed 
up  by  his  fleshy  soul.     Tit.  3:1,  Put  them  in  soul  to  be 


28  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

subject  to  magistrates.  James  1  :  8,  A  double  souled 
man  is  unstable  in  all  his  ways.  Ch.  4  :  8,  Purify  your 
hearts,  ye  double  souled. 

These  are  selected  from  seventy  places  where  it  would 
be  absurd  to  call  the  mind,  the  soul.  If  a  few  places  oc- 
cur where  soul  and  mind  can  be  used  interchangably,  so 
mind  and  person  may  be  so  used  ;  but  if  mind  and  soul 
were  synonymous  expressions,  they  could  with  propriety 
be  always  interchanged. 

Now  substitute  the  word  mind  for  soul. 

Gen.  2:7,  And  man  became  a  living  mind,  1  Sam. 
24 :  11,1  have  not  sinned  against  thee,  yet  thou  huntest 
my  mind  to  take  it.  Ch.  25  :  29,  Yet  a  man  is  risen  to 
pursue  thee,  and  to  seek  thy  mind  ;  but  the  mind  of  my 
lord  shall  be  bound  in  the  bundle  of  life ;  but  the  mind 
of  thine  enemies  shall  be  slung  out.  Ps.  40  :  14,  Let 
them  be  ashamed  and  confounded  together,  that  seek 
after  my  mind  to  destroy  it.  P.s.  17:  13,  Deliver  my 
mind  from  the  wicked,  which  are  thy  sword.  Ps.  22 : 
20,  Dehver  my  mind  from  the  sword,  my  miftd  from  the 
hand  of  the  dog.  Ps.  54 :  3,  Oppressors  seek  after  my 
miTid.  Josh.  11  :  11,  He  took  Hazor,  and  smote  all  the 
Qninds  that  were  therein,  with  the  edge  of  the  sword,  ut- 
terly destroying  them,  there  was  not  any  minds  left  to 
breathe.  Isa.  38  :  17,  Thou  hast  in  love  to  my  mind^  de- 
livered it  from  the  pit  of  corruption.  Isa.  53  :  10,  When 
thou  shalt  make  bis  inind  an  offering  for  sin.  12  v..  Be- 
cause he  hath  poured  out  his  mind  unto  death.  Jer.  2  : 
34,  In  thy  skirts  is  found  the  blood  of  the  minds  of  the 
poor  innocents.  Rev.  16:3,  And  every  living  mind  died 
in  the  sea. 

But  enough.  There  are  more  than  300  places  where 
it  would  be  absurd  to  call  the  soul  the  mind.  And  if  a 
few  places  can  be  found  where  the  words  are  interchang- 
able, — so  the  eyes  may  be  used  to  signify  the  mind  or  jfer- 
son,  in  190  cases.  Gen.  6:  8,  But  Noah  found  grace  in 
the  (eyes)  mind  of  the  Lord.  Job  22 :  29,  He  shall  save 
him  that  hath  low  eyes,  or  the  humble  person.  Pro  v. 
26 :  5,  Answer  a  fool  according  to  his  folly,  lest  he  be 
wise  in  his  own  eyes,  or  mind.  Deut.  7:16,  Thy  eye  or 
mind  shall  have  no  pity  on  them.  Ch.  28  :  26,  Her  eye, 
or  mind  shall  be  evil  towards  the  husband  of  her  bosom. 

But  the  eye  is  not  the  mind,  because  it  can  be  used  in 


THE  SOUL  IS  NOT  THE  MIND.  29 

a  figure  for  the  mind,  nor  is  the  mind  the  soul,  nor  the 
soul  the  mindy  because  in  a  figure  the  one  may  be  some- 
times used  for  the  other. 

The  neck  is  used  for  the  mind^  or  hearty  or  person.  Exo. 
33  :  5,  Ye  are  a  stiff-necked,  or  stiff-minded  people.  Deut. 
3 1 :  27,  I  know  ....  thy  stiff-neck,  or  mind.  Prov.  29 : 
1,  He  that  being  often  reproved,  hardeneth  his  neclc^ 
mind^  hearty  or  himself^  shall  suddenly  be  destroyed. 
Twenty  times  the  neck  is  used  for  the  mind.  The  head 
can  ten  times  be  called  the  mind.  Psa.  83  :  2,  They  that 
hate  thee  have  lifted  up  the  head^  mind^  or  person. 

The  face  is  thirty-eight  times  used  for  the  mifid.  Prov. 
21  :  29,  A  wicked  man  hardeneth  his  face,  or  mind,  or 
heart,  or  himself.  Ez.  14:6,  Turn  away  your  faces  from 
all  your  abominations  ;  that  is,  your  minds,  or  selves. 

The  hands  are  forty -eight  times  used  for  the  mind  or 
person.  Jud.  7:11,  Thou  shalt  hear  what  they  say,  and 
afterwards  shall  thy  hand  be  strengthened. 

The  ear  can  be  seventeen  times  called  the  mind  or  per- 
son :  the  mouth  six  times  :  the  tongue  ^yq  times  :  and 
the  feet  four  times.  There  are  320  passages  of  Scrip- 
ture where  the  members  of  the  man  can  consistently  be 
used  for  the  man  himself;  and  therefore  it  ought  not  to 
be  thought  surprising  that  the  soul,though  it  means  the 
man,  may  sometimes  be  called  the  miiid. 

In  seventy-six  places  flesh  can  be  called  the  soul,  or  a 
ghost,  with  as  much  propriety  as  the  mind.  Gen.  6:12, 
"  For  all  flesh  had  corrupted  his  way  upon  the  earth." 
Ecc.  5:6,"  Suffer  not  thy  mouth  to  cause  thy  flesh  to 
sin."  Isa.  49  :  26,  "  AW  flesh  shall  know  that  I  am  thy  Sa- 
viour." Eom.  12  :  1,  "  Present  your  bodies  (that  is,  your- 
selves) a  living  sacrifice."  Gal.  2  :  16,  "  For  by  the  works 
of  the  law  shall  no  flesh  (or  souls)  be  justified."  Eph.  5  : 
28,  "  So  ought  men  to  love  their  wives  as  their  own  bo- 
dies," (or  souls).  1  Sam.  18  :  1,  "  For  Jonathan  loved 
David  as  his  own  soul."  Mat.  19  :  19,  "  Thou  shalt  love 
thy  neighbor  as  thyself"  These  last  places  make  the 
body,  the  soul,  and  self,  one  thing. 

The  word  heart  occurs  970  times  in  the  Bible  ;  yet  in 
four  places^  only  is  the  fleshly  organ  meant ;  and  in  al- 
most all  the  other  places,  955,  it  truly  means  the  mind. 
Now  it  would  be  just  as  logical  to  call  the  heart  an  in- 
dependent living  thing,  because  the  functions  of  mind 


30  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

and  action  are  ascribed  to  it,  and  miscall  it  the  "  immor- 
tal heart,"  '•  the  deatMess  heart"  as  to  call  the  soul,  or 
mind,  or  spirit,  the  ''  immortal  soul,"  the  "  immortal 
mind,"  "  the  deathless  spirit,"  because  sometimes,  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  Hebrew  idiom,  life  and  action  are  as 
cribed  to  them. 


31 


CHAPTEE  III. 


WHAT  IS  A  SOUL  ? 

A  soul,  in  Scripture  phraseology,  means  an  animal,  or 
creature,  or  life ;  a  breathing  creature,  originally  de- 
signed  to  Hve  by  breathing  ;  whether  such  creature  be 
living  or  dead. 

First  : — Nephesh  and  psuche^  the  Hebrew  and  Greek 
words  for  soul,  are  translated  both  life  and  creature 
when  applied  to  beasts.  Moses  uses  nephesh^  chay^ 
chayiah^  and  chayim^  to  express  animal  life  and  creature ; 
and  these  words  are  generally  translated  50i^/,  life^  living^ 
lives^  and  creature.  The  very  first  time  that  the  w^ord 
nephesh^  or  soul^  occurs,  is  in  Gen.  1  :  20  ;  it  reads,  lite- 
rally, "  And  the  Elohim  said,  the  waters  shall  produce 
abundantly  the  creeping  living  soul,"  (or  creature, — she- 
retz  chayiah  nephesh.)  In  the  2 1st  verse,  we  find,  "  kal 
nephesh  chayiah  eramshat^'^  every  living  soul  or  crea- 
ture creeping.  The  24th  verse  reads,  "  Let  the  earth 
bring  forth  the  {nephesh  chayiaJi^)  living  soul^  or  living 
creature  after  its  kind,  cattle,  and  creeping  (chay)  crea- 
ture, and  beast  of  the  earth."  In  the  25th  verse,  "  And 
every  chay^^^  every  creature.  Again,  in  the  30th  verse, 
^^  And  to  every  thing  creeping  upon  the  earth,  which 
(has)  in  it  a  living  soul ;  (ulekel  rumesh  ol  earetz  asher 
bu  nephesh  chayiah.'*'^  In  Gen.  2  :  19,  these  living  souls 
are  brought  before  Adam,  "  and  whatsoever  he  named, 
every  living  soul^  {nephesh  chayiah)  that  was  the  name 
of  it." 

We  now  appeal  to  the  candid  : — If  nepliesh  chayiah^ 
in  the  quotations  we  have  given,  must  necessarily  mean 
a  living  creature  ;  and  if,  in  the  very  first  place  of  its 


32  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

occurrence^  Moses  applies  it  to  the  very  lowest  order  of 
animal  existence,  to  the  sheretz^  which  must  mean  some 
reptile  produced  by  the  waters^  having  a  creeping  mo- 
tion ;  and,  as  appears  from  Lev.  some  reptile,  or  amphi- 
bious creature,  that  the  Israelites  w^ere  forbidden  to  eat, 
how  can  it  ever  mean  an  abstract,  immortal  intelligence, 
.that  can  be  separated  from  the  creature,  and  yet  be 
conscious  ? 

"We  now  give  another  illustration  from  Gen.  2  :  7, 
"  And  Jehovah  Elohim  formed  man  of  the  dust  of  the 
ground,  and  blowed  into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  lives, 
and  man  became  a  {ncphesh  chayiahj)  a  living  soul,  (or 
living  creature.")  Thus  we  see  that  in  all  these  passages, 
Moses  applies  the  phrase  nephesh  chayiah^  or  living  soul, 
indiscriminately  to  all  creatures,  birds,  beasts,  insects, 
reptiles,  and  men.  Nephesh^  signifies  creature,  soul,  or 
breathing  frame,  also  life — and  is  derived  from  the  verb 
nesme^  to  breathe ;  chayiah^  is  living,  the  participle  of 
the  verb  to  hve.  All  Kving  creatures  are,  therefore, 
living  souls ;  and  he  who  denies  it  in  the  face  of  the 
Mosaic  record,  when  properly  explained  to  him,  is  verily 
guilty  in  the  sight  of  God.  Adam  Clarke,  commenting 
upon  verse  24th,  acknow^ledges  that  nephesh  chayiahy 
living  soul,  is  "  a  general  term  to  express  all  creatures 
endued  with  animal  life ;"  yet,  because  these  same  words 
are  used  for  mankind,  he  is  supposed  immortal  ! !  Pro- 
fessor Stuart,  in  his  "  Chrestoniathy,"  pag-e  86,  ver.  24, 
calls  nephesh  chayiahy  a  generic  term  for  living  creature, 
animal,  or  animated  being;  20th  ver.,  of  hving  or  ani- 
mated breath  ;  and  quotes  Job  41:21,  ''  His  nephesh 
kindleth  coals,  and  a  tiame  goeth  out  of  his  mouth.'* 
And  nearly  as  clear  is  it,  in  his  opinion,  in  Gen.  1  :  30. 
"We  give  a  few  more  examples,  without  comment.  Gen. 
6  :  19,  ''  And  of  every  nephesh  chayiah  of  all  flesh,  two 
of  every  sort  shalt  thou  bring  into  the  ark,  to  keep  them 
alive  with  thee  :  they  shall  be  male  and  female."  Gen. 
9:9,  "  And  behold  I  establish  my  covenant  with  you." 
10,  "  And  with  every  nephesh  chayiah  that  is  with  you, 
of  the  fowl,  of  the  cattle,  and  of  every  beast  of  the  earth 
v;ith  you."  12,  "  And  God  said,  this  is  the  token  of 
the  covenant  which  I  make  between  me  and  you,  and 
every  nephesh  chayiah  that  is  with  3'ou,  for  perpetual 
generations."     15,  '^  And  I  will  remember  my  covenant, 


WHAT  IS  A  SOULr  ^  I J  T*    ,  33     ' 

which  is  between  me  and  you,  and  every  nephe^i  chayiah 
of  all  flesh  ;  and  the  waters  shall  no  more  become  a  flood 
to  destroy  all  flesh."  16,  "  And  the  bow  shall  be  in  the 
cloud ;  and  I  will  look  upon  it,  that  I  may  remember  the 
everlasting  covenant  which  is  between  God  and  every 
nephesh  chayiah  of  all  flesh  that  is  upon  the  earth." 
Lev.  1 1 :  46,  "  This  is  the  law  of  the  beasts,  and  of  the 
fowl,  and  of  every  nephesh  chayiah  that  moveth  in  the 
waters,  and  of  every  creature  that  creepeth  upon  the 
earth." 

In  these  places,  nephesh  chayiah  is  translated  living 
creature,  and  once  hfe,  although  living  soul  occurs  some- 
times in  the  margin  of  the  best  Bibles.  Why  should  it 
mean  a  difierent  thing  when  applied  to  men  ?  Fifteen 
times  chayim,  lives,  is  rendered  living,  or  creature.  See 
Ezek.  1  :  5,  13,  15,  19,  22  ;  3:  13;  10:  15,  17,  20.  Gen. 
3:  14,  "Upon  thy  belly  shalt  thou  go,  and  dust  shalt 
thou  eat  all  the  days  of  thy  chay^  20,  "  And  Adam 
called  his  wife's  name  chayah^  life,  because  she  was  the 
mother  of  all  c/iay."  The  Septuagint  has  2^oe,  life,  for 
chavah  ;  and  zonton^  living,  for  chay. 

Lev.  21  :  18,  "  He  that  killeth  a  beast  shall  make  it 
good,  nephesh  for  nephesh^''  soul  for  soul.  The  margin 
reads  life  ;  the  text,  beast  for  beast ;  either  of  which 
would  be  just,  if  our  translators  had  been  consistent,  as 
nephesh  here  undoubtedly  means  the  whole  creature  ; 
and  when  applied  to  man,  the  whole  man ;  unless  excep- 
tion be  specially  named  :  as  where  psuche^  the  soul,  eats 
of  bodily  food,  while  the  body  wears  the  raiment  ;  in 
the  same  way,  as  a  man  means  the  whole  man,  except 
the  mind,  or  body,  or  head,  be  separately  designated. 

We  will  now* omit  the  word  nephesh  where  it  occurs 
in  the  following  texts,  and  supply  the  word  soul^  which 
is  its  equivalent.  Numb.  31  :  28,  "  Levy  a  tribute  unto 
the  Lord,  of  the  men  of  war  which  went  out  to  battle  ; 
one  soul  of  five  hundred,  both  of  the  persons,  and  of  th© 
beeves,  and  of  the  asses,  and  of  the  sheep."  Here  cattle 
and  persons  are  indiscriminately  called  souls.  Job  12: 
10,  '^  In  whose  hand  is  the  soul  of  every  living  things 
and  the  ruah^  breath,  of  all  mankind."  Prov.  12:  10, 
"  A  righteous  man  regardeth  the  soul  of  his  beast." 
Does  a  man  regard  the  invisible  ghost  of  his  beast  ? 
Isa.  46 :  1,  "  Their  idols  were  upon  the  beasts,  aftd  uppft 


34  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

the  cattle they  stoop,  they  bow  down  together, 

they  could  not  deliver  the  burden,  but  their  souls  are 
gone  into  captivity."  Ps.  84:  3,  "  Yea,  the  sparrow 
hath  found  a  house,  and  the  swallow  a  nest  for  her  soul^ 
where  she  may  lay  her  young,  even  thine  altars,  O  Lord 
of  Hosts."  Eev.  16:3,  ^' And  every  living  soul  died 
in  the  sea."  Did  the  immortal  souls  of  the  fishes  die, 
gentle  reader  ?  Job  41  :  20,  21,  Of  the  leviathan  it  is 
said,  *'  Out  of  his  nostrils  goeth  smoke,  as  out  of  a 
seething  pot  or  caldron.  His  soul  kindleth  coals,  and  a 
flame  goeth  out  of  his  mouth."  Nephesh  is  here  ren- 
dered breath.  Gen.  9:4,  "  But  flesh,  with  the  soul 
thereof,  which  is  the  blood  thereof,  shall  ye  not  eat." 
Lev.  17:  11-14,  *' For  the  soul  of  the  flesh  is  in  the 
blood,  he  shall  even  pour  out  the  blood  thereof,  for  it  is 
the  soul  of  all  flesh,  the  blood  of  it  is  for  the  soul  thereof, 
therefore  I  said  unto  the  children  of  Israel,  ye  shall  eat 
the  blood  of  no  manner  of  flesh,  for  the  soul  of  all  flesh 
is  the  blood  thereof"  Deut.  12  :  23,  "  Only  be  sure 
that  thou  eat  not  the  blood,  for  the  blood  is  the  soul, 
and  thou  may  est  not  eat  the  soul  with  the  flesh."  If 
the  soul  were  a  ghost,  leaving  the  body  at  death,  as 
theologians  tell  us,  no  one  could  eat  the  soul  I  1  Chron. 
11  :  19,  "  Shall  I  drink  the  blood  of  these  men  with  their 
soul  ^"  Deut.  24  :  6,  ''  No  man  shall  take  the  nether 
or  upper  millstone  to  pledge,  for  he  taketh  a  man's  soul 
to  pledge."  See  also.  Lev.  11:10,  and  Ezek.  47:9, 
where  nephesh,  the  soul,  is  twice  more  applied  to  every 
living  thing  of  the  waters. 

We  have  enumerated  thirty-two  places  where  nephesh, 
OT  psuche,  are  applied  to  the  beast,  and  to  every  living 
thing.  In  twelve  of  these  places  it  is  translated  life, 
twelve  times  a  creature,  twice  a  beast,  twice  self,  once 
breath  ;  and  only  three  times  soul  appears  in  the  margin  ! 
Our  translators  must  have  felt  the  absurdity  of  rendering 
nephesh  or  psuche,  a  soul,  as  implying  an  immortal  ghost, 
and  so  they  have  inserted  life,  or  something  of  a  corpo- 
real nature,  instead  of  soul ;  for  their  readers  might  have 
inferred,  that  if  beasts  were  souls,  so  men  might  be  soicls 
too,  and  possessing  only  a  superior  animal  nature,  might, 
consequently,  be  but  mortal  after  all.  Chay,  chayiah, 
and  chayim  occur  hundreds  of  times,  and  though  gene- 
rally translated  life,  they  are  sometimes  translated  crea- 


WHAT  IS  A  SOUL  ?  35 

ture^  so  tliat  the  inspired  writers  need  not  use  the  word 
nejjJiesh  when  they  meant  to  express  life. 

Nephesh^  the  soul^  is  translated  life^  when  the  soul  is  in 
danger  of  corporeal  death.  We  give  a  few  instances  to 
show"  the  sense  nephesh  sometimes  bears.  Ex.  4  :  12 
•^^  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses,  Go,  return  into  Egypt, 
for  all  the  men  are  dead  which  sought  thy  soitiy  What 
could  those  men  have  done  with  the  ghost  of  Moses  had 
they  found  it  ?  Jos.  2  :  12-14,  "  Swear  unto  me  ...  that 
ye  will  save  alive  my  father,  and  my  mother,  and  my 
brethren,  and  my  sisters,  and  all  that  they  have,  and  de- 
liver our  souls  from  death.  And  the  men  answered  her, 
our  souls  instead  of  you  to  die,  if  ye  utter  not  this  our 
business."  These  men  thought  their  souls  could  die. 
Jud.  18  :  25,  "  Let  not  thy  voice  be  heard  among  us, 
lest  bitter  souled  fellows  run  upon  thee,  and  thou  lose 
thy  soul,  with  the  souls  of  thy  household."  2  Sam.  19  : 
5,  "  Thou  hast  shamed  this  day  the  faces  of  all  thy  ser- 
vants, which  this  day  have  saved  thy  soul,  and  the  soul 
of  thy  sons,  and  of  thy  daughters,  and  the  souls  of  thy 
wives,  and  the  souls  of  thy  concubines."  Job  2  :  4, 
"  Yea,  all  that  a  man  hath  will  he  give  for  his  soul."  6. 
v.,  "  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Satan  ;  Behold  he  is  in 
thine  hand,  only  save  his  soul."  Jer.  48  :  6,  "  Flee,  save 
your  soul,  and  be  like  the  heath  in  the  wilderness."  2 
Sam.  1:9,  "  Slay  me,  for  anguish  is  come  upon  me,  be- 
cause my  soul  is  yet  whole  in  me."  Prov.  13:8,"  The 
ransom  of  a  man's  soul  are  his  riches."  See  also  1  Sam, 
20  :  1  ;  23  :  15  ;  2  Sam.  16  :  11 ;  1  Kings  19  :  1-4  ;  Pro. 
1 :  19 ;  Jer.  22  :  25 ;  Jonah  4:3;  Ex.  21  :  23  ;  Deut 
19  :  21  ;  2  Sam.  14  :  7  Gen.  19  :  17,  19  ;  27  :  16  ;  46  ;  32 
30  ;  42  :  15,  16  ;  44  :  30  ;  47  :  25  ;  Ex.  1  :  14  ;  21  :  30 
Num.  35  :  31 ;  Jos.  9  :  24  ;  Jud.  12  :  3  ;  9:17;  1  Sam! 
19  :  5,  11  ;  22  :  23  ;  26  :  24 ;  28  :  9,  21  ;  2  Sam.  4  :  8 
23:  17;    1  Kings  1  :  12;  2  :  23 ;  3:  11;  20:  31,  39,  42 

2  Kings  1:  13,  14;  7:  7;  10:  24;  1  Ch.  11:  19;  2  Ch 
1  :  11;  Es.  7:  3,  7;  8:  11;  9:  16;  Job  6:  11;  13  :  14 
Ps.  31 :  13  ;  38  :  12  ;  64  :  1  ;  Pr.  1 :  18  ;  4 :  13  ;  22  :  23 
6  :  26  ;  7  :  23  ;  13  :  3  ;  16  :  15  ;  Is.  15  :  4  ;  38  :  12  ;  43 
4;  Jer.  4:30;  11  :21;  19 :  7,  9 ;  34:20,21;  38:  2,  16 
39:  18;  44:  30;  45:  5;    46:26;    49:37;    Lam.  2 :  19 

3  :  53 ;    5:9;    Ezk.  3:18;    13  :  10,  22  ;  32  :  10  ;  Jonah 
I:  14;  Deut.  24:6. 


36  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

Here  are  ninety -six  places  in  which  the  word  nephesh 
occurs  in  the  original ;  it  is  generally  translated  life. 
"When  you  read  them  you  will  be  astonished  to  find  that 
the  soul  of  man  is  waylaid,  watched,  hunted,  and  killed, 
by  human  enemies.  These,  added  to  the  thirty-two 
texts  given  before,  and  twenty-two  times  where  nephesh 
is  rendered  life  and  living^  when  applied  to  beasts^  wall 
make  150  times  in  all,  where  fiephcsh  is  rendered  life  and 
living ;  but  it  would  shock  all  common  sense  to  suppose 
an  immortal  soul  is  meant  in  any  one  case. 

There  are  scores  of  other  places  where  nephesh  means 
life^  or  ^person  endowed  wdth  life^  where  our  translators 
have  used  the  word  soul.  Now,  if  the  w^ord  soul  means 
an  immortal  ghost,  there  can  be  no  reasonable  objection 
to  a  substitution,  just  to  test  its  congruity.  1  Sam.  24  : 
11,  "I  have  not  sinned  against  thee,  yet  thou  huntest 
my  ghost  to  take  it."  "What  did  Saul  w^ant  with  David's 
immaterial,  invisible  ghost  ?  1  Sam.  25  :  29,  "  Yet  a 
man  is  risen  to  pursue  and  to  seek  thy  ghost  ;  but  the 
gliost  of  my  Lord  shall  be  bound  in  the  bundle  of  life^ 
with  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  the  ghosts  of  thy  enemies, 
then  shall  he  sling  out. ^^  Can  immortal  souls  be  slung 
out  of  the  bundle  of  life  ?  1  Sam.  26 :  21,  ''  I  will  no 
more  do  thee  harm,  because  my  ghost  was  precious 
in  thine  eyes  this  day."  Ps.  35  :  4,  "  Let  them  be  con- 
founded and  put  to  shame  that  seek  after  my  ghost." 
Ps.  40  :  16,  "  Let  them  be  ashamed  and  confounded  to- 
gether that  seek  after  my  ghost  to  destroy  it."  What  I 
destroy  an  immortal  soul,  David  !  Ps.  7  :  1,  "  Save  me 
from  him  that  persecutes  me,  and  deliver  me ;  lest  he 
tear  my  ghost  like  a  lion,  rending  it  in  pieces,  while 
there  is  none  to  deliver :  ***  if  I  have  rew^arded  evil  *** 
let  the  enemy  persecute  my  ghost  and  take  it ;  yea,  let 
him  tear  down  my  chayah^  hfe  upon  the  earth."  Ps.  26 : 
9,  "  Take  not  aw^ay  my  nephesh^  ghost,  with  sinners,  nor 
my  chayah^  life,  with  men  of  blood."  Ps.  22  :  20,  "  De- 
liver my  nephesh,  ghost,  from  the  sword  ;  my  nephesh^ 
ghost,  from  the  hand  of  the  dog,  save  me  from  the  lion's 
mouth."  See  also,  1  Sam.  25  :  29  ;  Ps.  17  :  13  ;  35  :  12, 
17  ;  54  :  3,  4  ;  55  :  18  ;  56  :  6  ;  57  :  4,  6  ;  59  ;  3  ;  66  :  9  ; 
69:18;  70:2;  71:10,13;  74:19;  86  ;  14  ;  94  :  21  ; 
97  :  10  ;  109  :  20,  31  ;  120  :  2,  6  ;  124  :  7  ;  123  :  4  ;  142  ; 
4  ;   143  :  12  ;  Pr.  29  :  10  ;  Jer.  20  :  19, 


WHAT  IS  A  SOUL  ?  37 

In  all  these  examples,  human  enemies  seek  to  destroy 
the  souls  of  the  righteous.  Do  you  tell  us  that  soul 
means  here  life  or  person  ?  Allowed  ;  and  why  not  life 
or  person  in  every  case,  where  other  than  animals  are  in- 
tended ?  I  have  before  me  118  selected  texts  where  ne- 
2^hesh  is  translated  soul^  where  it  undoubtedly  means 
life^  person^  or  self;  but  the  texts  presented  will  suffice 
for  those  willing  to  receive  the  truth.  As  for  the  rest, 
if  they  believe  not  Moses  and  the  prophets,  neither  would 
they  be  persuaded,  though  one  should  rise  from  the 
dead. 

THE    GREEK    WORD    PSUCHE  IS  EQUAL  TO    THE  HEBREW   WORD 
NEPHESH. 

The  Greek  term  psuche  is  the  only  Greek  word  used 
for  soul.  It  comes  from  psucho^  to  breathe ;  to  blow  ; 
its  primary  meaning  is  the  breath,  a  living  being,  any 
animal  that  lives  by  breathing  ;  the  soul.  Life  is  a  se- 
condary and  an  accommodated  use  of  the  term.  Moses 
wrote  in  Hebrew,  "  and  man  became  nephesh  chayioh^'^ 
which  Paul  translates  into  Greek,  1  Cor.  15  :  45,  "  The 
first  made,  Adam  was  made  into  psuchen  zosan^  a  living 
soul,"  or  creature.  Again,  Ps.  16  :  10,  David  wrote, 
"  For  thou  wilt  not  leave  my  nephesh  in  sheol ;"  which 
Peter  translates,  Acts  2 :  27,  "  Thou  wilt  not  leave  my 
psuche  in  hadesy  Thus  then  we  have  inspired  authority 
for  making  psuche  equal  to  nephesh.  In  Exo.  4  :  19,  it 
reads,  "The  Lord  said  unto  Moses,  Go,  return  in  Egypt, 
for  all  the  men  are  dead  which  sought  thy  nephesh^ 
Compare  Mat.  2  :  20  :  "  Arise,  and  take  the  young  child 
and  his  mother,  ard  go  into  the  land  of  Israel,  for  they 
are  dead  which  sought  the  young  child's  psuche.^''  As 
these  texts  correspond,  so  psuche^  here,  means  the  same 
as  nephesh^  there.  Eead  1  Kings  19  :  9-14,  "  For  the 
children  of  Israel  have  ....  slain  thy  prophets  with  the 
sword  ;  and  I,  even  I  only,  am  left ;  and  they  seek  my 
nephesh  to  take  it  away."  Pom.  11  :  3,  "Lord,  they 
have  killed  thy  prophets,  and  digged  down  thy  altars  ; 
and  I  am  left  alone,  and  they  seek  my  psuche^  The 
Greeks  need  not  use  psuche  to  express  simply  life,  as 
they  have  more  appropriate  words,  therefore,  when 
translated  life^  it  carries  with  it  the  idea  of  being.     As 


38  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

life  is  essential  to  the  conscious  existence  of  the  creature, 
so  psuche  sometimes  equally  represents  life  and  being. 
We  give  a  few  examples  of  its  use. 

Phil.  2 :  30,  "  For  the  work  of  Christ,  he  was  nigh 
unto  death,  not  regarding  his  psuche.''''  Luke  14 :  26, 
"  If  any  man  come  to  me,  and  hate  not  his  father,  and 
mother,  and  wife,  and  children,  and  brethren,  and  sisters, 
yea,  and  his  own  psuche  (immortal  soul,  shall  we  say  ?) 
also,  he  cannot  be  my  disciple."  Acts  15  :  26,  "  Men 
that  have  hazarded  their  psuchas  for  the  name  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ."  Can  men  hate  and  hazard  the  loss 
of  their  "  immortal"  souls  for  the  sake  of  Christ .?  But 
they  can  hazard  their  souls,  or  lives,  or  being,  for  the 
present  time.  Luke  9  :  24.  "  For  whosoever  will  save 
his  psuche  ("  immortal"  soul  ?)  shall  lose  it  :  but  whoso- 
ever will  lose  hm  psuche  ("  immortal"  soul  ?)  for  my  sake, 
the  same  shall  save  it.  For  what  is  a  man  advantaged, 
if  he  gain  the  whole  world  and  lose  himself,  or  be  cast 
away  ?"  To  lose  the  mortal  soul  then  is  to  lose  himself, 
his  being.  See  also  in  Luke  17  :  33,  a  similar  expres- 
sion. John  12  :  25,  ''  He  that  loveth  his  psuche  shall  lose 
it,  {apolesia^  shall  destroy  it ;)  and  he  that  hateth  his 
psuche  in  this  world,  shall  keep  it  unto  zoen  aionion^  life 
for  ages."  Eev.  12:  11.  ^' And  they  loved  not  their 
psuchen  unto  the  death."  Mark  3:4.  "  Is  it  lawful  to 
do  good  on  the  Sabbath  days,  or  to  do  evil  ?  to  save 
psuche^  or  to  apokteinai  ;  kill  ?"  Luke  6  :  9,  says,  "des- 
troy it."  The  soul  then  can  be  killed  and  destroyed,  and 
that  this  means  literal  death,  is  evident  by  the  allusion 
to  beasts  in  the  context.  Rev.  16:3.  "  And  every 
psuche  zoes,  living  soul  died  in  the  sea."  In  Mat.  16  : 
24-27  ;  and  Mark  8  :  34-38,  our  translators,  by  putting 
life  for  psuche,  have  hidden  the  allusion  to  "  himself," 
and  the  period  of  reward  referred  to. 

Matt.  10 :  28,  has  been  often  quoted  as  favoring  the 
separate  existence  of  the  soul.  But  when  properly 
translated,  and  compared  with  the  parallel  account  of 
Luke,  it  does  not  furnish  the  shadow  of  a  shade  of  sup- 
port to  the  Pagan  fable.  "  Fear  not  them  who  apoktei- 
nonton,  murder  (in  the  sense  of  cutting  in  pieces,)  the 
soma,  body,  but  cannot  apokteinai,  kill,  (in  the  sense  of 
utterly  destroy)  the  psuche,  soul  or  being  ;  but  rather 
fear  him  who  is  able  apolesai^  to  destroy  both   {psuche 


WHAT  IS  A  SOUL  ?  39 

and  soma)  body  and  being,  in  Gehenna."  The  meaning 
undoubtedly  is,  that  wicked  men  can  only  destroy  the 
present  being  of  the  righteous,  and  that  God  could  raise 
them  up  again  ;  but  if  they  apostatized  to  save  their 
.  present  lives,  that  God  was  able — which  implies  that  he 
would  do  it — to  destroy  their  entire  being  in  Gehenna. 
Luke  12:4,  "I  say  unto  you,  my  friends^  be  not  afraid 
of  them  that  kill  the  body,  and  after  that  have  no  more 
that  they  can  do.  But  I  will  forewarn  you,  whom  ye 
shall  fear :  Fear  him,  who,  after  he  has  killed,  has  power 
to  cast  into  Gehenna ;  yea,  I  say  unto  you.  Fear  him." 
The  very  allusion  to  the  place  of  destruction,  Gehenna^ 
shows  that  it  means  the  destruction  of  being.  See  the 
term,  Gehenna,  explained  in  a  subsequent  page.  He 
that  insists  that  Matthew  means  ^.psuche^  that  can  exist 
in  life,  while  the  body  is  dead,  must  consistently  explain 
what  Matthew  says,  10;  39,  "He  that  findeth  \i\&  psuche 
shall  lose  it  :  and  he  that  loseth  his  psuche  for  my  sake, 
shall  find  it :"  for  here  the  same  general  sentiment  is 
conveyed.  A  free  translation  removes  all  the  difficulty. 
Harwood  renders  Matt.  10:28,  "Fear  not  those  who 
can  only  inflict  upon  you  bodily  pain  and  torture,  and 
deprive  you  of  a  precarious  being — but  whose  power 
extends  no  farther.  But  let  that  great  Being  be  the 
object  of  your  fear,  who  can  involve  both  soul  and  body 
in  total  and  everlasting  destruction.  Let  that  great 
Being,  I  repeat  it,  be  the  object  of  your  constant  fear." 
Every  reasonable  person  must  perceive  that  psuche 
means  a  person's  self  The  learned  know  that  Matthew, 
who  probably  wrote  his  gospel  in  Hebrew,  uses  a  great 
many  Hebrew  idioms  ;  while  Luke,  who  wrote  in  a 
purer  style  of  Greek,  avoids,  to  a  certain  extent,  these 
Hebrew  idioms.  Thus  we  find  that  Luke  often  explains 
Matthew.  It  was  customary  for  the  Hebrews  to  use 
the  expressions,  my  soul,  your  soul,  instead  of  the  reflec- 
tive pronouns,  myself,  yourself,  &c.  It  is  evident  that 
Luke  understood  a  man's  soul  to  be  himself, — nothing 
more,  nothing  less, — and,  although  he  was  a  Doctor,  he 
evidently  had  not  graduated  into  the  Pagan  philosophic 
theology  of  the  present  day. 


40  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

THE  NEPHESH  AND  PSUCHE  EAT  AND  DRINK,  AND  MIGHT  BE 
OFTEN  TRANSLATED  MAN. 

Mat.  6  :  25,  "  Therefore  I  charge  you ;  be  not  anxious 
about  your  psuche J  what  ye  shall  eat,  or  what  ye  shall 
drink ;  nor  about  your  (soma)  body,  what  ye  shall  wear. 
Is  not  the  psuche  a  greater  gift  than  food ;  and  the  body 
than  raiment  ?"  Lu.  12:  19,  "  And  I  will  say  to  my 
psuche,  Psuche,  thou  hast  much  goods  laid  up  for  many 
years;  take  thine  ease,  eat,  drink,  and  be  merry."  What 
the  rich  man  is  said  to  have  laid  up  for  his  psuchem  ver. 
19th,  is  in  the  21st  verse  said  to  be  laid  up  for  himself. 
But,  gentle  reader,  does  the  "  immortal  soul"  eat  and 
drink  ?  Yea,  the  soul  must  eat  to  live!  Ex.  12:  16, 
"  No  manner  of  work  shall  be  done  in  (the  first  and 
seventh  day  of  the  passover,)  save  that  which  every 
nephesh  must  eat."  2  Kings  12:  4,  "  The  money  that 
every  nephesh  is  set  at."  1  Chron.  5:  21,  '^  They  took 
away  their  cattle;  of  their  camels  fifty  thousand,  of  their 
sheep  two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand,  of  the  asses  two 
thousand,  and  oi  nephesh  oi  \x\q\\  one  hundred  thousand." 
Numb.  19:  16,  '*  Whosoever  toucheth  one  that  is  slain 
with  a  sword  in  the  open  fields,  or  (a  meth  nephesh^  a 
dead  soul,  or  the  bone  of  a  nephesh,  or  a  grave,  shall  bo 
unclean  seven  days."  In  the  first  three  examples  from 
the  Old  Testament,  man  appears  in  the  text,  but  soul  in 
the  margin ;  but  in  the  last,  both  text  and  margin  are 
silent.  Were  the  translators  perfectly  honest  in  this  ? 
But,  what  would  have  become  of  the  immortal  soul 
theory,  if  these  texts  had  been  rightly  translated  ?  We 
know  not  w^hat  language  could  more  expressively  point 
out  the  mortality  of  the  soul  of  man.  The  soul  not 
only  eats  and  drinks,  but  has  bones  and  dies,  and  defiles 
him  who  touches  it.  In  John  10:  24,  psuche  is  trans- 
lated us. 

In  the  following  quotations,  nephesh  is  variously 
translated,  but  is  rtipresented  as  eating  bodily  food  : — 
Lev.  7:  20,  "  But  the  soul  that  eateth  of  the  flesh  of  the 
sacrifice."  27th  verse,  "  Whatsoever  soul  it  be  that 
eateth  any  manner  of  blood,  even  that  soul  shall  be  cut 
off  from  his  people."  Lev.  17:  12,  ^'  No  soul  of  you 
shall  eat  blood."  15th  ver.  "  And  every  soul  that  eateth 
that  which   died   of  itself,  or  that  which  was  torn  of 


WUAT  IS  A  SOUL.  41 

beasts,  he  (that  soul)  shall  both  wash  his  clothes,  and 
bathe  himself  in  water,"  &c.  Do  ghosts  eat  torn  flesh 
and  blood,  wash  their  clothes,  and  bathe  themselves  ? 
We  shall  be  told  soul  here  means  the  person  himself. 
To  be  sure  it  does  ;  and  so  it  does  in  every  other  place 
in  which  the  word  occurs  :  though  life^  the  essential 
attribute  of  self,  would  sometimes  better  express  the 
sense.  Deut.  12  :  20,  ''  Because  thy  soul  longeth  to  eat 
flesh  ;  thou  mayest  eat  flesh,  whatsoever  thy  soul  lusteth 
after."  Ps.  78  :  18,  "  They  tempted  God  in  their  heart, 
by  asking  meat  for  their  nephesh?'^  But  improperly 
translated  lust.  Pr.  16  :  26,  "  The  nephesh  of  him  that 
laboreth,  laboreth  for  himself;  for  his  mouth  craveth  it 
of  him."  If  nephesh  be  a  ghost,  then  the  ghost  labors 
for  bread,  and  the  mouth  of  the  ghost  craveth  it  at  the 
hand  of  the  ghost.  Prov.  27:  7,  "  The  full  soul  treadeth 
under  foot  a  honeycomb  ;  but  to  the  hungry/  soul^  every 
bitter  thing  is  sweet."  Ecc.  6:7,  "  All  the  labor  of 
man  is  for  his  mouth,  and  yet  the  nephesh  is  never  filled." 
How  absurd  to  suppose  a  ghost  is  here  intended  ;  won- 
der why  they  translated  nephesh,  appetite  !  See  also, 
Exo.  12:  15,  19;  Lev.  7 :  18,  21,  25  ;  17:10;  19:8; 
26  :  6,  11  ;  Numb.  11:6;  21 :  4,  5  ;  Deut.  12  :  15,  21  ; 
14  :  26  ;  1  Sam.  2:16;  Job  6  :  7  ;  33  :  20 ;  Ps.  103  :  1, 
2;  107:5,9,18;  Pr.  6 :  30  ;  10:3;  13:4,25;  16:24; 
19:  15;  25:25;  27:  27;  Ecc.  2:  24;  6 :  2,  3  ;  Isa.  29: 
8;  32:6;  58:3,5,10,11;  Jer.  31 :  14,  25;  50:19; 
Lam.  1 :  11,  19 ;  2 :  12 ;  Mic.  7:1;  Mat.  6:  25  ;  Luke 
12:  19,28;  Eev.  18:  14. 

Here  are  seventy-two  texts  where  the  soul  eats  of 
earthly  bread  and  milk,  of  flesh  and  blood,  and  honey, 
and  drinks  water.  And  all  this  eating  is  done  by  the 
soul,  even  when  mentioned  with  the  body,  and  while  the 
body  wears  the  raiment.  Here  again  the  conclusion  is 
irresistible,  that  the  soul  means  no  more  nor  less  than 
the  person  himself  As  it  would  be  in  the  highest  de- 
gree absurd  to  call  the  soul  a  separate  entity,  a  ghost 
that  can  exist  without  body  or  parts,  in  more  than  six 
hundred  places,  which  we  have,  and  shall  enumerate, 
where  the  word  nephesh  occurs  ;  so  in  the  other  two 
hundred  places  where  there  is  nothing  in  the  context  to 
determine  its  material  and  mortal  nature,  it  is  absurd 


4S  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION, 

and  wicked  to  infer  that  it  is  immaterial  and  immortal, 
to  favor  a  Pagan  fable,  in  the  face  of  these  plain  and  nu- 
merous expressions  of  God's  word.  But  the  soul  not 
only  eats  and  drinks,  but  can  be  defiled  by  touching  a 
dead  carcase.  Lev.  22 :  6,  "  The  soul  which  hath 
touched  any  such  (unclean  carcase,)  shall  be  unclean 
until  even,  and  shall  not  eat  of  the  holy  things,  unless 
he  (the  soul)  wash  his  flesh  with  water."  Job  6 :  7, 
"  The  things  that  my  soul  refuseth  to  touch,  are  my  sor- 
rowful meat."  See  also,  Lev.  5 :  2,  3  ;  7:21;  11  :  43, 
44 ;  Numb.  19  :  13,  22.  Here  are  twelve  more  instances 
where  the  soul  can  handle  the  dead  carcase,  and  eat 
food.     So  the  soul  is  the  person. 

NEPHESH,  THE    SOUL,  IS  CORRECTLY  RENDERED  PERSON  IN 
THIRTY-FOUR  PLACES. 

Deut.  10 :  22,  "  Thy  fathers  went  down  into  Egypt 
with  three  score  and  ten  nephesh  ;"  translated,  persons. 
These  are  the  same  seventy  souls  that  came  out  of  the 
loins  of  mortal  Jacob. 

Numb.  31:35,  "  And  thirty- two  thousand  nephesh  in 
all,  of  women."  Verse  40,  "  Of  the  nephesh^  were  six- 
teen thousand  ;  of  which  the  Lord's  tribute  was  thirty- 
two  nephesh;''''  persons.  46  ver.  "  Sixteen  thousand 
nepheshy 

Ezk.  27  :  13,  "  They  traded  the  nephesh^  of  men,  and 
vessels  of  brass  in  the  market."  Rev.  18  :  13,  "  They 
traded  in  beasts,  and  sheep,  and  horses,  and  chariots, 
and  slaves,  and  j^swcAe  of  men." 

Deut.  24 :  7,  "  If  a  man  be  found  stealing  a  nephesh 
of  his  brethren  of  the  children  of  Israel,  and  maketh 
merchandize  of  his  nephesh^  and  selleth  his  nephesh ; 
then  that  thief  shall  die  ;  and  thou  shalt  put  away  evil 
from  among  you."  In  this  text  nephesh  occurs  three 
times  ;  once  it  is  translated,  any,  and  twice,  him.  If  we 
w^ere  to  apply  the  strict  grammatical  precision  to  this 
verse,  as  our  friends  do  in  their  endeavors  to  pervert 
certain  texts,  to  favor  the  fondly  cherished  fable  of  the 
separate  existence  of  the  soul,  then  w^e  might  say,  that 
the  stolen  soul  had  a  soul  that  might  be  sold.  Now,  if 
a  nephesh  be  indeed  an  immaterial  ghost,  then,  we  have 


WHAT  IS  A  SOUL  ?  43 

here,  the  ghost  of  a  ghost,  gentle  reader,  and  that  is  as 
much  as  can  be  found  in  the  immortal  soul  theory  ; 
surely  it  is  less  than  nothing,  and  vanity  ! 

Numb.  19 :  18,  "  And  a  clean  nephesh  shall  take  hys- 
sop, and  dip  it  in  the  water,  and  sprinkle  it  upon  the 
tent,  and  upon  all  the  vessels,  and  upon  all  the  nephesh 
that  were  there."  Could  a  clean,  invisible  ghost  per- 
form all  this  ceremony  ?  Is  it  wonderful  that  those  who 
wish  to  conceal  the  meaning  of  nephesh^  should  twice 
render  it  person  here  ? 

See  also,  Prov.  14:  10;  Gen.  14:21;  30:6;  Exod. 
16:  16;  Lev.  19:  15;  27:2;  Numb.  5:6;  31 :  35  ;  40: 
46  ;  2  Sam.  14:14;  Jer.  52 :  29,  30  ;  Ezk.  17  :  17.  In 
all  these  places,  nephesh  is  rendered  person^  but  in  most 
of  them  the  margin  reads  soul. 

SOULS  CAN  BE  KILLED  OR  MURDERED. 

See  Numb.  31 :  19  ;  35  :  11,  15,  30  ;  Deut.  27 :  25  ; 
Josh.  20  :  3,  9  ;  1  Sam.  22  :  22  ;  Prov.  28  :  17.  We 
give  a  few  as  they  stand. 

Here  nephesh  is  translated  person^  without  any  note  in 
the  margin  !  Numb.  31 :  19,  "  Whosoever  hath  killed 
any  nephesh^  Why  have  the  translators  striven  to  blot 
out  the  evidence  that  these  passages  afford  of  the  nature 
and  mortality  of  the  soul  of  man  ?  And  why  do  learned 
sectarians  cling  so  closely  around  the  King^s  version, 
which  they  know  is  thus  so  glaringly  and  shamefully 
corrupted  ?  Is  it  because  they  are  aware  that  a  new 
and  correct  version  of  the  original  text  would  overturn 
all  their  creeds  ?  We  call  upon  the  lovers  of  truth  to 
choose  between  Creedism  and  Christianity.  Ye  cannot 
at  the  same  time  serve  God  and  Mammon.  If  you  are 
determined  to  cleave  to  the  loaves  and  fishes,  and  the 
popularity  of  sectarianism,  we  pray  you,  for  consistency 
sake,  to  abjure  the  name  of  Christian,  and  fight  under 
your  own  appropriate  colors. 

Numb.  35  :  11  ;  "  That  the  slayer  may  flee  (to  the 
city  of  refuge)  which  killeth  any  nephesh^  at  unawares.-' 
15th  ver.  "  That  every  one  that  killeth  any  nephesn,  at 
unawares,  may  flee  thither."  30th  ver.  "  Whosoever 
killeth  any  nephesh^  the  murderer  shall  be  put  to  death 
by  the  mouth  of  witnesses."     Deut.  27  :   25,  "  Cursed 


44  DIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

be  he  that  taketh  reward  to  slay  an  innocent  nephesh^ 
1  Sam.  22  :  22,  "  I  have  occasioned  the  death  of  all  the 
nephesh  of  thy  father's  house."  Prov.  28  :  17,  *^  A  man 
that  doeth  violence  to  the  blood  of  any  nephesh^  shall 
flee  to  the  pit ;  let  no  man  stay  him."  If  the  soul  has 
blood,  and  may  be  slain,  what  becomes  of  its  boasted 
immortality  .? 

NEPHESH  IS  TRANSLATED  SELF. 

Twenty-five  times  is  nephesh^  the  soul^  rendered  hirm- 
self^  herself^  and  themselves  ;  w^hich  we  hold  to  be  con- 
clusive proof  that  the  translators  so  understood  its 
meaning.  Lev.  11  :  43,  "  Ye  shall  not  make  your  neph- 
csh  abominable  with  any  creeping  thing,  neither  shall  ye 
make  your  nephesh  unclean  w'ith  them."  So  in  verse  44, 
nephesh  is  twice  translated  yourselves.  Josh.  23 :  11, 
"  Take  good  heed,  therefore,  unto  your  nephesh^  that  ye 
love  the  Lord  your  God."  Esth.  4:  13,  "  Think  not 
with  thy  Tz^jote/t,  that  thou  shalt  escape."  Job  18:  4, 
"  Ho  teareth  his  nephesh  in  his  anger."  We  wonder 
whether  Job  tore  his  ghost  !  Ps.  131  :  2,  "  Surely  I 
have  quieted  my  nephesh^  as  a  child  that  is  weaned." 
Isa.  46  :  2,  "But  their  nephesh  are  gone  into  captivity." 
Jer.  3  :  11,''  Backsliding  Israel  hath  justified  her  nephesh 
more  than  treacherous  Judah."  Isa.  47 :  14,  "They 
shall  not  deliver  their  nephesh  from  the  power  of  the 
flame."  So  material  fire  will  burn  up  the  soul  !  See 
also,  Jer.  37  :  9 ;  51  :  14 ;  Amos  2  :  14,  15  ;  Deut.  4:5; 
Esth.  9:31;  1  Kings  19 :  4  ;  Job  32  :  2  ;  Ps.  81:3; 
Jer.  17:21;  Amos  6:8;  Jonah  4:8;  Prov.  6 :  16. 
In  most  of  these  places,  the  margin  reads  soul. 

Isa.  5 :  14,  "  Therefore  sheol  hath  enlarged  her  neph- 
esh. The  grave  hath  enlarged  her  being,  and  opened 
her  mouth  without  measure."  Surely  the  grave  hath 
no  ghost  J  not  even  in  a  figure.  Gen.  27  :  4,  19,  25,  31, 
says,  that  Isaac's  soul  blessed  his  son  ;  but  ver.  7  and  10 
says,  that  he  himself  blessed  his  son.  So  nephesh^  the 
soul,  always  means  self.  In  Numb.  30  :  2,  4-13,  If  a 
man  or  w^oman  bind  his  or  her  nephesh,  is  tw^elve  times 
repeated  ;  yet  ver.  3,  declares,  she  bound  herself.  1  Pet. 
3 :  20,  "  While  the  ark  was  preparing,  wherein  few,  that 
is   eight  psuchcy  were   saved   by  water."     2  Pet.  2 :  5, 


WHAT  IS  A.  SOUL  ?  46 

these  souls  are  called  persons.  We  could  give  one  hun- 
dred and  ten  similar  examples,  if  it  were  necessary. 

In  two  hundred  and  six  places,  the  flesh  and  body  are 
terms  used  to  signify  the  man  himself ;  if,  therefore,  the 
flesh  means  the  person,  the  body  means  the  person,  and 
the  soul  means  the  person ;  then  are  flesh,  body,  and 
soul,  synonimous  expressions.  Ps.  145  :  21,  "  Let  all 
yiesh,  (persons^)  bless  his  holy  name,  forever  and  ever." 
Eccl.  5  :  6,  "  Suffer  not  thy  mouth  to  cause  thy  j^eshj 
{thyself^)  to  sin."  Isa.  49  :  26,  ^'  And  aWjleshj  (people^) 
shall  know  that  I,  the  Lord,  am  thy  Saviour."  Jer.  25 : 
31,  "  He  will  plead  with  oXX  fleshy  {persons  ;)  he  will  give 
them  that  are  wicked  to  the  sword."  Gen.  7:15,  "  All 
flesh:'  Ver.  21,  "  All  flesh  died."  Phil.  1 :  20,  "  Christ 
ehall  be  magnified  in  my  body^  {ov  person.y  Rom.  12  :  1, 
"  That  ye  present  your  bodies^  (j^ersons^)  a  living  sacri- 
fice, holy,  acceptable  unto  God."  Eph.  5 :  28,  ^'  So 
ought  men  to   love  their  wives,  as  their   own   bodies^ 

(selves.y^     Ps.  63  :  1,  "  0  God my   soul  thirsteth 

for  thee,  my  flesh  longeth  for  thee."  Here  is  a  pa- 
rallelism, in  which  soul  and  flesh  are  made  equally  to 
represent  the  person.  Here  is  another:  Ps.  16:  10, 
"  Thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  the  grave^  (in  sheol^) 
neither  wilt  thou  suffer  thy  Holy  One  to  see  corruption." 
Here  soul,  body,  and  Holy  One,  or  Christ  himself,  are 
synonimous. 

NEPHESH  AND  PSUCHE  ARE  OFTEN  RENDERED  HEART  AND 
MIND,  WHEN  THE  PERSON  IS  OBVIOUSLY  INTENDED. 

"We  propose  to  show,  that  where  nephesh  and  psuche 
are  translated  heart  or  mind^  that  the  life  and  person  are 
meant  in  every  instance.  Exod.  23  :  9,  "  For  ye  know 
the  nephesh  (soul,  or  feelings,  or  life,)  of  a  stranger, 
seeing  ye  were  strangers  in  the  land  of  Egypt."  Com- 
pare 1 :  14,  "  And  they  made  their  nephesh  (souls,  or 
lives,)  bitter  with  hard  bondage."  Numb.  20  :  15,  "  We 
have  dwelt  in  Egypt  a  long  time  ;  and  the  Egyptians 
vexed  us  and  our  fathers:^  Then  it  was  the  us  and  the 
fathers  themselves  that  were  afflicted  ;  for  who  could 
tell  aught  about  the  invisible  ghost  of  a  stranger.  See 
also,  Deut.  24  :  15 ;  Ezek.  24:  25  ;  31 :  10 ;  Isa.  64  :  7, 
where  the  soul  means  self.     Pro  v.  14:  10,  "  The  heart 


46  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

knoweth  the  bitterness  of  his  nephesh  ;"  the  sorrows  of 
his  life  and  being ;  for  the  heart  surely  has  no  ghost. 
Prov.  27 :  9,  "  Ointment  and  perfume  rejoice  the  heart  : 
so  doth  the  sweetness  of  a  man's  friend,  from  the  counsel 
of  the  nephesh^''''  {soul,  or  his  counsel.)  Ps.  35  :  25,  "  Let 
them  not  say  in  their  hearts.  Ah,  ah,  our  7iephesh^  (soulsy 
or  we,)  would  have  it  so  :  let  them  not  say,  we  have 
swallowed  him  up."  Ps.  10:  3,  "  The  wicked  boasteth 
of  his  soul's  desire  ;"  his  desire.  Eph.  6 :  6,  "  Doing 
the  will  of  God  from  the  psuche,^^  (soul,  with  our  whole 
person,  heartily.) — (Lam.  3:51;  Ezek.  25  :  6.)  Col.  3  : 
23,  "  And  whatsoever  ye  do,  do  it  with  the  sow/,"  (with 
the  whole  person ;  earnestly.)  Here  are  eleven  times 
the  soul  is  rendered  heart.  In  the  following  texts  the 
soul  is  six  times  rendered  the  mind.  2  Sam.  17  :  18. 
"  And  be  bitter  in  soul.''  Eccl.  6:9,"  Better  is  the 
sight  of  the  eyes,  than  the  walking  of  the  soul."  That 
is, better  are  good  eyes  to  the  lame  than  good  legs  to  the 
blind.  Mic.  7:3,  "  That  they  may  do  evil  with  both 
hands  earnestly,  the  prince  asketh,  and  the  judge  asketh 
for  a  reward  ;  and  the  great  man,  he  uttereth  the  mis- 
chief of  his  soul :  so  they  wrap  it  up."  He  uttereth  his 
mischief  Acts  14:  2,  "But  the  unbelieving  Jews 
stirred  up  the  Gentiles,  and  made  their  psuchas,  {souls,) 
evil  affected  against  the  brethren ;"  made  them  evil 
affected.  Phil.  1 :  27,  "  That  ....  I  may  hear  .... 
that  ye  stand  fast  in  one  spirit,  with  one  psuche,  (soul,) 
striving  together  for  the  faith  of  the  Gospel."  That  ye 
be  of  one  disposition,  united  in  your  endeavors  to  spread 
the  faith ;  that  ye  all  may  be  one,  even  as  I  am  one  with 
the  Father.  Heb.  12  :  3,  "  Lest  ye  be  wearied,  and 
faint  in  your  psuchais''  (souls.)  In  yourselves  ;  a  para- 
phrase, for  the  sake  of  emphasis. 

IN  THE  FOLLOWING  PLACES   NEPHESH  IS  RENDERED  SOUL 
WHERE  IT  UNDOUBTEDLY  MEANS  MAN  OR  PERSON. 

Numb.  19 :  20,  "  But  the  man  that  shall  bo  unclean, 
and  shall  not  purify  himself,  that  nephesh,  (man,  trans. 
soul,)  shall  be  cut  off  from  among  the  congregation." 
Gen.  17  :  14,  "  The  uncircumcised  man  child  is  the  same 
soul  that  shall  be  cut  off  from  his  people."  Lev.  5  :  1-4, 
"  If  a  nephesh,  (man,  tr.  soul,)  sin,  ami  hear  the  voice  of 


WHAT  IS  A  SOUL  ?  47 

swearing,  and  is  a  wntness,  whether  he  hath  seen  or 
known  of  it,  if  he  do  not  utter  it,  then  he  shall  bear  his 
iniquity.     Or  if  a  iiephesh,  (man,  tr.    soul,)  touch  any 

unclean  thing  ....  he  also  shall  be  unclean or  if 

he,  the  soulj  or  ma7i,  touch  the  uncleanness  of  man  .... 
when  HE  knoweth  it,  he  shall  be  guilty.  Or,  if  a  nephesh 
swear,  pronouncing  with  his  lips  to  do  evil,  or  to  do 
good  ....  when  he  knoweth  of  it,  then  he  shall  be  guilty." 
Here  the  soul  hearing,  touching,  having  Hps,  is  identified 
by  the  personal  pronouns  to  be  the  identical  man. 
Could  a  ghost  do  these  things  ?  Lev.  6 :  2,  "  If  a 
nephesh,  [soul,  or  man,)  sin  ...  .  and  he  unto  his  neigh- 
bour, &c in  any  of  all  these  that  a  man  doeth  .  ,  .  . 

then  he  shall  restore."  The  same  person  called  a  soul 
in  the  second  verse  is  called  a  man  in  the  third.  Ezek. 
18:4,  "  The  soul  (the  man,)  that  sinneth,  {he)  shall  die." 
Can  an  immortal,  never-dying  soul,  die  ?  Yet  the  13th 
verse  asks  concerning  him  that  commits  abominations, 
"  Shall  he  live  ?  he  shall  not  live :  he  hath  done  all  these 
abominations  ;  he  shall  surely  die  ;  his  blood  shall  be 
upon  him."  But  a  ghost  has  no  blood,  so  the  soul  is 
the  mortal  man,  that  sinning  and  not  repenting,  shall 
die,  and  remain  dead  forever.  Six  times  in  this  chapter 
is  a  soul  called  a  man.  See  also,  Ezek.  14:  14,  18  ;  3  : 
19,21;  33:  5,  9;  Exod.  12:4,  15,  19  ;  31:14;  Lev. 
18  :  22,  29  ;  7  :  25  ;  16  :  29  ;  17  :  12-15  ;  22 :  3 ;  Numb. 
15  :  30,  31. 

In  Lev.  4  :  27,  the  nephesh  of  the  comnaon  people  is 
translated  any  one  of  the  people. 

But  the  nature  and  mortality  of  the  soul  is,  if  possible, 
made  clearer  still,  in  Numb.  19:  13,  "Whosoever 
touch eth  the  meth  nephesh,  the  dead  soul  of  any  man 
that  is  dead,  and  purifieth  not  himself . .  .  that  (nephesh) 
soul,  shall  be  cut  off  from  Israel."  Here  one  of  the 
"  whosoever"  is  called  a  soul,  that  can  touch  a  dead 
soul  a  Can  any  language  more  forcibly  teach  the  mor- 
tality of  the  soul  ?  Deut.  24  :  7,  "  If  a  man  be  found 
stealing  a  nephesh,  (soul,)  of  his  brethren  of  the  children 
of  Israel,  and  maketh  merchandize  of  him,  (that  is,  of 
the  stolen  soul,)  or  selleth  him  ;  then  that  thief  shall  die  ; 
and  thou  shalt  put  evil  away  from  among  you."  Here 
the  nephesh  is  translated  any.  In  Judges  18  :  25,  bitter 
of  soul  fellows,  is  rendered  angry  fellows.-    Ps.  105  :  18, 


48  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

"  The  feet  of  Joseph  they  hurt  with  fetters  :  his  nephesh 
came  into  irons  ;"  translated,  he. 

We  have  now  presented  thirty  cases,  w^here  nephesh^ 
undoubtedly  means  the  man  himself,  even  in  the  opinion 
of  the  translators  ! 

Nephesh  is  translated  fish^  in  Isa.  19  :  10,  "  They  shall 
be  broken  in  the  purposes  thereof,  all  that  make  sluices 
and  ponds  for  (nephesh^)  fish." 


49 


CHAPTEE  IV, 


IS  THE  SOUL  IMMORTAL  1 

OR,  CAN  IT  FAILj  OR   DIE,  BEFORE  GOD,  AS  INTIMATED  3N  OUR 
MOTTO  ? 

We  have  already  answered  this  question  in  the  nega- 
tive, in  the  previous  chapter,  by  proving  that  the  soul  is 
the  man,  and  that  the  soul  or  man  can  die,  and  does 
die ;  yet  those  who  are  aware  of  the  evasions  of  those 
determined  to  uphold  the  traditions  of  the  fathers,  will 
justify  us  in  bringing  forward  more  testimony. 

Thirty  times  the  Bible  ascribes   the   term  nepheshj 
{soul,)  to  every  living  thing  moving  in  the  air  or  waters. 
Are  the  sonls  of  these  creatures  immortal  ?     The  terms,  "^ 
^'  immortal   soul,"  "  never-dying  soul,"   or   "  deathless*^ 
spirit,"  although  so   frequently  used  by  theologians  in  i^ 
these  days  of  superstition,  cannot  be  found  any  where 
in  the  Bible.     The  word  immortal  is  but  once  used  int^ 
the   authorized  version,  and  is  applied  to  God.     See 
1  Tim.  1  :  17,  *^  Now  unto  the  King,  eternal,  immortal, 
(aphtharto,  without  corruption,)  invisible,  the  only  [wise] 
God."     Our  motto,  from  Isa.  57  :  16,  declares   that  the 
soul  and  spirit  can  fail,  before  God ;  therefore  must  the 
soul  be  mortal ;  and,  in  accordance  therewith,  we  find 
the  word  m^ortal  used  seven  times,  mortality  once,  and 
mortally  twice,  in  reference   to  man.     And  the  reason 
why  these  terms   are  used  so  infrequently  is,  that  the 
Scriptures  employ  the  terms  death,  dying,  corruptible, 
decaying,  without  the  slightest  exception,  to  the  whole 
man,  although  a  strictly  literal  translation  of  the  fre- 
quently occurring  term  enotish^  would  have  given  us 


5Q  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

very  many  examples  of  mortal  man.  2  Chron.  14  :  II, 
"  Let  not  mortal  man  prevail  against  thee."  Job  4:17, 
"  Shall  mortal  man  be   more  just   than  God  ?"     We 

/have  proved  the  term  man  comprehends  his  whole 
t    nature,  and  it  is  mere  evasion  of  plain   testimony   to 

wassert  that  a  part  of  man  is  mortal,  and  a  part  immortal. 
The  word  declares  that  man,  without  exception  of  parts, 
is  mortal,  which  cannot  be  true  if  the  soul,  as  the  es- 
sential man,  be  immortal.     I  Cor.  15  :  53,  54,  "  For  thi& 

corruptible,  must  put  on  incorruption,  and  this  mortal 
must  put  on  immortality,  (at  the  resurrection)."  Mark, 
the  mortal  and  corruptible  man,  if  a  Christian,  puts  on 
at  a  future  period^  something  that  he  does  not  at  present 
possess,  and  that  something  is  the  very  opposite  of  cor- 
ruption and  mortality,  even  incorruption  and  immor- 
tality. The  word  mortality  is  also  found  in  Rom.  6 : 
12;  8:  11  ;  2  Cor.  4:11.  In  these  three  places  the 
body  is  called  mortal ;  now,  as  there  is  but  one  living 
principle  in  man,  if  that  inheres  in  his  body,  then  are 
tjie  phrases,  living  man,  and  living  human  body,  of  like 

^-^gnification  ;  for  to  say  that  the  soul  i&  living  and  im- 
mortal, abstracted  from  the  body,  or  man,  and  the 
j^body  is  mortal  and  therefore  living,  is  to  say  that  there 

^^are  two  living  men  in  each  man,  which  is  an  absurdity. 
The  word  mortality  is  found  in  2  Cor.  5  :  4,  "  That 
mortality  might  be  swallowed  up  of  life."  Paul  is  here 
speaking  of  two  tabernacks,  or  church  arrangements  ; 
the  one  church  is  for  a  season  only,  and  is  earthly  ;  the 
other  is  everlasting,  and  is  heavenly.  That,  while  we 
are  in  this  earthly  church,  we  groan  being  burthened 
with  trouble  and  mortality^  yet  he  is  not  desirous  of 
putting  off  this  connection  with  the  earthly  church  ; 
but  he  is  exceedingly  desirous  of  being  covered  by  the 
New  Jerusalem  Church,  which  is  to  come  down  from 
Heaven,  that  his  present  mortal  nature  may  be  absorbed 
in  hfe  everlasting,  or  immortality  ;  when  (chap.  4 :  14,) 
"  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  raise  up  us  also  by  Jesua,  and 
shall  present  us  with  you."     Thus  does  Paul   declare, 

/that  himself,  and  his  Corinthian  brethren,  were  mortal, 

^ntil  the  resurrection. 

/     Mortally^   occurs   Deut.  19:  11,  and  Job  4:  17.     Im- 

^   mortality  is  used  only  jive  times ;  twice  it  refers  to  the 

^resurrection,  when  the  saints  are  to  assume  it.     See 


IS  THE  SOUL  IMMORTAL  ?  SI 

1  Cor.  15 :  53,  54;  2  Tim.  1  :  lO ;  once  in  Eom.  2:7, 
where  it  is  an  object  held  out  to  be  sought  after.  "  To  i,^ 
them  who,  by  patient  continuance  in  well  doing,  seek  for  ^--^ 
glory,  honor,  and  immortaUty,  God  will  render  eternal"^^^ 
life."  Could  we  be  consistently  urged  to  seek  for  what 
all  men  naturally  possess  ?  and  could  eternal  life  be  said 
to  be  conditionally  bestowed  only  upon  the  seekers,  if 
the  common  theory  were  true  ?  For  what  a  man  hath 
already,  why  doth  he  yet  seek  after  ?  But  if  we  seek 
for  that  we  do  not  at  present  possess,  then  do  we  with 
patience  wait  for  it.  Immortality  is  likewise  applied  to 
God,  1  Tim.  6:  16,  "  Who  only  hath  immortality."  As 
natural  immortality  is  here  declared  to  be  the  exclusive 
attribute  of  God,  the  assumption  of  natural  immortality 
by  man,  is  the  assumption  of  an  exclusive  attribute  of 
Jehovah  !  Again,  in  JRom.  6  ;  23,  Eternal  life,  or  immor- 
tality, is  said  to  be  the  gift  of  God,  through  Christ,  to 
the  justified  only.  But  abundant  life,  everlasting  life, 
shall  live  for  ever,  which  mean  of  necessity,  the  per- 
petuity of  conscious  being,  or  immortality,  and  nothing 
else,  are  terms  that  are  so  often  applied  to  the  justified 
through  Christ,  and  to  the  justified  only^  that  it  is  need- 
less to  particularize.  It  has  been  attempted  to  force 
these  terms  from  their  proper  and  obvious  meaning, 
giving  to  them  the  signification  of  everlasting  glory  and 
happiness.  But  that  the  terms  mean  perpetual  con- 
scious existence,  in  opposition  to  the  continued  extinction 
of  conscious  existence  or  death,  must  be  obvious  to  all 
who  will  collate  the  passages. 

Suppose  we   put  the    "  orthodox"    construction  on 
certain  plain  passages,  that  we  may  see  how  incongruous 
they  read.     John  3  :  16,  "  For  God  so  loved  the  world,./ 
that  he  gave   his   only   begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  ,  /  / 
belie veth  in  him  should  not  (have   everlasting  life  in  tor-     / 
meat,  but)  have  everlasting  (happiness  and  glory.)"     We  ^ 
consider  this  a  fair  exhibition  of  the  construction  which      j 
those  who  believe  in  the  immortaUty  of  the  soul  would    |/ 
put  upon   this   verse.     But  this  is  not  only  a  shameful 
adding  to  the  word  of  God,  forbidden  in  Prov.  30  :  6, 
"  Add   thou  not  unto  his  words,  lest  he  reprove  thee, 
and  thou  be  found    a  har,"  and,  Eev.  22 :  18  ;  but  it       > 
utterly  destroys   the   sense   and  contrast.     The  proper     '«/ 
contrast  to  everlasting  hfe,  is  the   entire  extinction  of    J 


62  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

being;  and  sucli  the  Scriptures  declare  shall  be  the 
everiasting  condition  of  those  unfortunate  beings  who 
count  themselves  unworthy  of  eternal  life.  The  "  ortho- 
dox*' would  be  as  much  justified  in  turning  the  word 
love  into  hate^  as  the  word  perish  into  everlasting  life  in 
misery ;  yet,  unfortunately,  they  do  this  to  sustain  their 
traditions.  But,  if  God  had  already  given  to  the  wicked 
endless  life,  in  giving  them  an  '*  immortal  soul,"  he 
would  not  have  offered  it  as  the  peculiar  privilege  of 
/tj>e  righteous.  Christ  declares  that  the  wicked  have  no 
y^e'm  them — no  principle  of  immortality  in  them.  On 
the  contrary,  Paul  declares,  that  if  the  spirit  of  him  that 
-  raised  up  Christ  from  the  dead  dwell  in  you,  God  shall 
RB-enliven  your  mortal  bodies,  (or  natures,by  or  on  ac- 
count of)  his  spirit  that  dwelleth  in  you. 

We  give  some  of  the  Greek  terms  that  imply  mortality 
and  immortality.  Athanasia,  without  death,  or  death- 
lessness,  is  ascribed  to  God  only,  as  its  only  natural 
possessor,  in  1  Tim.  6:16,  and  to  the  resurrected  saints 
in  1  Cor.  15  :  53,  54.  Thanatos^  {death^)  occurs  often 
where  even  the  "  orthodox"  would  not  construe  it  to 
^jpean  eternal  misery.  Matt.  20  :  18,  "  The  Son  of  Man 
"  sjiall  be  betrayed  unto  the  chief  priests  and  unto  the 
^^scribes,  and  they  shall  condemn  him  to  death  (thanatos)  ;^^ 
not  to  eternal  misery,  surely  ?  Matt.  26 :  38,  "  My 
soul  (psuche^)  is  exceedingly  sorrowful,  even  unto  deaths 
{fhanatos.y  Matt.  10:21,  "Brother  shall  deliver  up 
the  brother  to  dcath^  {thanatosy  Luke  2 :  26,  "  It  was 
revealed  unto  (Simeon)  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  he 
should  not  see  deaths  {thanatos^)  before  he  had  seen  the 
Lord's  Christ."  Death  does  not  mean  eternal  misery 
here,  nor  yet  the  separation  of  the  soul  from  the  body, 
for  such  a  death,  according  to  the  orthodox,  would  not 
have  precluded  his  vision  of  the  Lord's  Anointed.  John 
11:  4,  13,  "This  sickness  (of  Lazarus)  is  not  unto 
death  \'''  yet  Jesus  spake  of  his  death.  John  12  :  32,  33, 
"  And  I,  if  I  be  hfted  up  from  the  earth,  will  draw  all 
men  unto  me.  This  he  said,  signifying  what  death  (tha- 
natos)  he  should  die."  If  thanatos^  in  all  these  places, 
and  many  more  we  could  cite,  must  mean  the  cessation 
of  Hfe,  so  it  must  mean  in  Eom.  6 :  23,  where  it  is  con- 

Jrasted  with  the  Hfe  which  God  has   promised.     "  For 
he  wages  of  sin  is  deaZh  {thanatos) ;  but  the  gift  of  God 


IS  THE  SOUL  IMMORTAL  ?  53 

is  eternal  life  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord."  But  ^' 
mortality,  and  immortality,  are  more  often  indicated 
by  words  implying  corruption  and  incorraption.  2 
Pet.  2 :  12,  "  But  these,  (those  that  walk  after  the 
flesh  in  the  lust  of  uncleanness,)  as  senseless  animals 
made  only  to  be  taken  and  {phthoran^)  rotted^  or  cor- 
rupted, speak  evil  of  what  they  understand  not,  and  will 
(likewise)  be  {kata-phthare-sontai^)  utterly  rotted  in  their 
own  corruption^  (phthora.y  This  passage  is  analagous 
to  Ecc.  3  :  19,  where  the  wise  man  states  that  irrespec- 
tive of  a  resurrection,  there  is  no  difference  in  the  death 
of  man  and  beast,  as  both  are  naturally  constituted 
alike.  Acts  13:  36,  "  For  David  ....  was  laid  unto  his 
fathers,  and  saw  corruption  {dia-phthoran.y  If  you  say 
that  this  apphes  only  to  his  body,  and  that  his  soul 
escaped  corruption,  then  you  contradict  and  falsify  God^s 
word,  for  that  says  David,  himself  of  course,  saw  or  ex- 
perienced corruption.  The  reference  is  to  Ps.  16  :  10, 
"  Thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  sheol^  in  the  state  of 
death,  or,  thou  shalt  not  suffer  thy  Holy  One  to  see  cor- 
ruption, {diaphthorany  And  Paul  argues  that  David 
could  not  have  spoken  of  himself,  because  his  soul^  or 
himself,  had  seen  corruption.  Phthartos  expresses  its 
opposite,  by  the  privative  a  being  placed  before  it.  God 
is  immortal,  because  he  is  incorruptible ;  men  are  mortal 
because  corruptible  in  all  their  living  parts.  Incorrup- 
tion  is  ascribed  to  God  in  1  Tim.  1  :  1 7 ;  a  correct  trans- 
lation of  which  is,  "  And  unto  the  King  of  the  ages, 
incorruptible  (a-phtharto^  invisible,  the  only  God,  be 
honor  and  glory,  for  ages  of  ages.  Amen."  Eom.  1  :  23, 
"  They  changed  the  glory  of  the  incorruptible  (a'phthar- 
tou)  God,  into  an  image  made-hke  to  corruptible 
{phthartou)  man,  and  to  birds,  and  four-footed  beasts, 
and -creeping  things."  Campbell  translates  these  ex- 
pressions by  immortal  God,  and  mortal  man.  Here 
men  are  again  classed  with  beasts  as  corruptible  and 
mortal,  and  contrasted  with  God,  who  is  immortal  and 
incorruptible.  Surely  this  is  plain  enough  for  those  w^ho 
are  willing  to  receive  the  truth.  We  challenge  our^^ 
opponents  to  produce  a  single  instance,  where  any  word^  , 
signifying  incorruptibility, indissolubility,  immortality,  ots/ j 
any  word  of  like  signification,  is  applied  to  man  in  hisy 
natural  state. 


54       •  BIBLE  VS,  TRADITION. 

THE  NAMES  GIVEN  TO  MAN  MOST  CLEARLY   INDICATE  HIS 
MORTALITY. 

There  is  an  exceedingly  numerous  class  of  texts  in 
the  Hebrew,  which  strongly  express  the  mortality  of  the 
soul  of  man,  in  the  various  appellations  given  unto  him, 
but  which  are  entirely  obscured  in  our  translation. 
When  it  is  intended  to  designate  man  merely  as  an 
animal,  or  creature,  he,  in  common  with  the  beasts,  is 
called  a  soul,  nephesk^  as  having  a  common  origin  with 
the  beasts,  as  being  made  of  dust,  and  as  having  with 
them  a  common  animal  nature,  sustained  by  the  common 
breath  of  lives.  But  w^hen  man  is  spoken  of  in  connec- 
tion with  the  beasts,  to  distiyigiiish  him  from  them  he  is 
called,  in  all  places — excepting  Exod.  11:7,  and  19  :  13, 
where  he  is  called  a  man  of  virtue  or  courage, — by  the 
name  Adam^  pointing  out  his  relationship  to  the  first 
man.  The  places  may  be  found  under  the  head  of 
"  Beast  joined  with  Man,"  in  Cruden. 

There  are  ten  different  Hebrew  words,  that,  in  the 
common  version,  are  rendered  person  ;  and  there  are  no 
less  than  seventy-eight  different  Hebrew  words,  that  are 
translated  by  the  common  terms  man  and  men.  These 
Hebrew  names  are  mostly  compound  nouns,  so  com- 
bined with  an  adjective,  as  to  be  expressive  of  a  variety 
of  distinct  qualities  of  the  man  designated  by  them. 

The  principal  terms,  how^evep,  are  : — 

1.  Adam;  man  of  earth. 

2.  Ha- Adam  ;  the  man  Adam. 

3.  Enoiish  ;  a  mortal  man. 

4.  Nephesh  ;  a  soul,  animal  life,  or  breath  ;  an  animal 

intended  to  live  by  breathing. 

5.  Nephesh- Adam  ;  an  animal,  or   creature  made  of 

earth,  that  lives  by  breathing. 

6.  Eesh ;  a  man  of  valor,  or  virtue 

7.  Baal ;  an  owner,  master. 

8.  Gever  ;  men  of  strength. 

9.  Anosheem  ;  plural  of  enoush^  mortals. 

10.  Metheem  ;  plural  of  death  ;  metaphor  for  men, — 

literally,  men  as  subjects  of  death. 

11,  Kosho  ;  a  bad  man. 

12. .  Khokhom  ;  a  wise  man. 


55 

In  consequence  of  the  neglect  to  transfuse  the  idea 
conveyed  by  these  compound  terms,  the  meaning  of 
many  passages  of  Scripture  is  completely  obscured  in 
the  authorized  version.  Examples  : — Gen.  2:5,"  There 
was  not  an  Adam  to  till  the  Adam-ah?''  Gren.  1  :  26, 
^'  Let  us  make  Adam  (a  man  of  earth)  in  our  image." 
Josh.  5:  13,  "  When  Joshua  was  by  Jericho  ,  .  Behold, 
there  stood  {eesh)  a  man  of  virtue,  or  courage,  over 
against  him."  Job  10 :  5 ;  addressing  God,  Job  says, 
^^  Are  thy  days  as  the  days  of  (enoush^)  a  mortal  ?  Or 
thy  years  like  even  the  time  of  {gever^)  a  strong  man  ?" 
If  our  translators  had  honestly  translated  these  terms, 
what  would  have  become  of  their  favorite  theory  of  the 
immortality  of  man  ?  Here  man  is  not  only  designated 
as  mortal,  but  is  contrasted  with  God  on  that  very  ac- 
count ;  and  yet,  strange  to  say,  theologians  tell  us  that/ 
the  existence  of  the  souls  of  all  men,  runs  parallel  with^ 
the  existence  of  God  !  and,  consequently,  that  Job's  ^, 
contrast  is  a  failure.  It  would  be  folly  to  call  m,any^ 
mortal,  if  his  essential  nature  was  immortal.  Ps.  8 :  4, 
'^  What  is  {enoush^)  a  mortal,  that  thou  art  mindful  of 
him  ?  and  even  of  the  son  of  Adam,  (as  was  man  in  his 
best  estate,)  that  thou  visitest  him  ?"  Ps.  9  :  20,  "  Put 
them  in  fear,  O  Lord  :  that  the  nations  may  know  them- 
selves to  be  but  {anosheem^)  mortals."  Put  the  ortho- 
dox construction  on  this  last  verse,  and  it  becomes 
nonsense.  Put  them  in  fear,  that  the  nations  may  know 
that  they  are  immortal ;  that  though  their  bodies  might 
be  destroyed,  their  souls  would  live  for  ever  !  Pro  v. 
30  :  2 ;  the  common  version  reads,  "  Surely  I  am  more 
brutish  than  any  man,  and  hav^  not  the  understanding 
of  a  man  ;"  which  thus  appears  hke  two  ways  of  affirm- 
ing the  same  thing  :  while  in  the  Hebrew,  the  exact  use 
of  terms,  by  a  beautiful  antithesis,  gives  a  finished 
character  to  the  passage.  Thus,  "  Surely  I  am  more 
ignorant  than  {cesh^  a  man  of  virtue,)  I  have  not  even 
the  understanding  of  ^^am,  {a  man  of  earth.)" 

Adam^  a  man  of  earth,  is  translated  man  one  hundred 
and  sixty-eight  times,  men  twenty-seven  times,  and  sons 
of  men  twenty -one  times  ;  making  two  hundred  and  six- 
teen places  where  man  is  designated  as  made  of  earth, 
and  therefore  mortal,  w^hich  places  cannot  be  true,  if  the 
essential  man  consists  of  an  immortal  soul.     Remember, 


66  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION, 

It  is  this  same  man,  made  of  earth,  that  became  a  living 
Boul  simply  by  the  impartation  of  the  animating  principle, 
the  neshemet  ruah  chayim^  the  breath  of  the  spirit  ol 
lives,  the  universal  principle  of  all  animal  hfe ;  which 
principle  is  said  to  be  in  the  nostrils  of  every  creature. 
When  God  created  man,  he  called  their  name,  that  is, 
the  name  of  the  species,  Adam,  as  being  made  of  earth ; 
a  term  necessarily  indicative  of  mortality,  and  given  as 
expressive  of  his  nature,  even  when  he  had  not  sinned. 
And  God  made  a  conditional  provision  for  the  continua- 
tion of  the  lives  of  the  earthly  creatures  he  had  made,  by 
planting  the  tree  of  lives  within  their  reach.  Mark  too, 
that  when  man  had  sinned,  God  drove  him  from  this  tree, 
"  Lest  he  should  eat  thereof  and  hve  for  ever."  This  is 
another  clear  testimony  of  the  Almighty  of  the  mortality 
of  man.  But  after  the  curse,  and  the  penalty  of  God's 
law,  which  is  the  extinction  of  being,  began  to  be  fre- 
quently executed,  then  was  born  a  son  of  Seth,  who  was 
named  Enos,  or  Enoush,  that  is,  mortal^  and  inspiration 
makes  this  name  one  of  the  distinguishing  appellations  of 
the  human  race.  Now  to  apply  this  term  to  the  body  as 
forming  only  a  part  of  the  man,,  and  denying  that  it  ap- 
plies to  man,  as  man,  as  a  compound  whole,  is  to  flatly 
contradict  the  plain  testimony  of  inspiration. 

The  term  enoush^  a  mortal^  is  improperly  translated 
vnayi^  thirty-seven  times;  and  men^  ^nq  times,  making 
forty-two  times.  "We  insert  all  the  places  : — Jud.  9  :  9, 
13;  Job  4:  17;  5  :  17  ;  7:  1,17;  9  :  2;  10  :  4,  5,  6 ;  13: 
9;  14:  19;  15:  14;  25:4,  6;  32:  8;  33:  12;  Ps.  8:  4; 
9:  19;  10:  18;  55:  11;  90:3;  103:  15;  104:15;  144: 
3 ;  "  Lord,  what  is  Adam,  that  thou  takest  knowledge  of 
him  !  or  the  son  of  enoush,  a  mortal,  that  thou  makest 
account  of  him  !  Adam  is  like  to  vanity  :  his  days  are 
as  a  shadow  thatpasseth  away."  Dan.  4 :  16  ;  7  :  4,  13  : 
6:  7,  12;  3:  10;  Gen.  47:6;  Isa.  13:7,12;  23:  8;  51: 
12 ;  56  :  2.  Enoush  is  translated  men,  Deut.  32 :  26 ;  Isa^ 
51:7;  Job  28  :  4  ;  Ps.  9  :  20 ;  73  :  5. 

Nepheshj  is  translated  man,  Exo.  12  :  16.  Nephesh 
Adam,  is  translated  man,  Lev.  24 :  17 ;  and  men,  1  Chro. 
5  :  21  ;  Ez.  27  :  13.  Zera  anosheem,  the  seed  of  mortal 
men,  is  translated  man-child  in  1  Sam.  1 :  1 L 

Anosheem  J  mortals,  is  translated  men;  1  Sam.  31 :  1 ; 
2  Sam.  2-  17,4;  Ezra  10:9;  Jer.  43:9;  1  Sam.  4:9; 


67 

Ez.  23  :  45  ;  Job  34  :  10.  It  is  translated  of  men  m  four- 
teen texts.  Jer.  9 :  22.  "  Even  the  carcases  oianosheem 
shall  fall  as  dung  upon  the  open  field."  It  is  translated 
person^  Jud.  9:4;  Zeph.  3:4.  It  is  translated  men  of 
war  twenty-five  times.  Anosheem  as  a  designation  of 
mortal  men  occurs  at  least  seventy-one  times. 

Metheem^  death  men,  or  men  as  subjected  to  death,  oc- 
curs Deut.  33  :  6  ;  Job  31:31;  Ps.  17  :  14 ;  Isa.  3  :  25 ; 
41  :  14. 

Here  is  the  argument  drawn  from  the  names  applied  to 
man.  In  five  himdred  and  forty  places,  man  is  designa- 
ted by  terms  that  indicate  that  he  is  made  of  earth,  terms 
that  forcibly  point  out  his  corruptible  and  mortal  nature. 
And  one  hundred  and  twenty-one  times  is  man  expressly 
called  piortal,  six  hundred  and  sixty-one  times  in  all ;  and 
this  too,  in  addition  to  the  many  places  where  he,  in  com- 
mon with  the  beasts,  is  termed  a  soul,  a  term,  the  ortho- 
dox to  the  contrary  notwithstanding,  equally  expressive 
of  mortality.  As  a  set-oflF  to  this,  there  cannot  be  found 
one  single  passage,  that,  properly  expounded,  affords 
even  an  inference,  that  man  in  his  natural  state  is  im- 
mortal, or  that  he,  the  man,  has  an  existence  separately 
from  the  body.  Every  passage  usually  supposed  to  fa- 
vor immortality  will  be  examined  in  its  place.  What 
then  is  the  inevitable  answer  to  the  question,  Is  the  soul, 
or  man  immortal  ?  All  nature  and  experience  reply  No  ; 
and  inspiration  expressly  says  No  ;  and  informs  us  that 
the  family  of  Abraham  were  buried  in  the  cave  of  Mach- 
pelah  ;  that  "  David  was  laid  to  his  fathers  and  saw  cor- 
ruption, and  that  his  sepulchre  is  with  us  to  this  day," 
and  therefore  when  he  spake  of  a  soul  or  person,  that 
was  not  left  in  the  grave,  neither  saw  corruption,  he 
spake  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ ;  "  Eor  David  is  not 
ascended  into  the  heavens" ;  but  Jesus  Christ  has ; 
whence  he  shall  come  in  the  clouds  of  heaven,  to  raise 
his  sleeping  saints  from  the  dust  of  death.  Besides  all 
this,  the  Scriptures  expressly  inform  us  that  the  wicked 
shall  be  annihilated,  which  shall  be  considered  in  its  place. 
But  so  strong  is  prejudice,  that  we  are  aware  that  so  long 
as  two  stones  of  the  citadel  of  error  will  hold  together, 
there  are  many  that  will  continue  fondly  to  cling  to 
them. 


58  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

THE    SOUL    IS   IN   BITTERNESS   AND   FAINTS. 

Ps.  107.  Hungry  and  thirstry  their  souls  fainted  in 
them.  If  an  "  immortal"  soul  can  faint  for  bodily  food, 
it  can  also  starve  and  die.  See  Numb.  24 :  4  ;  Ps.  107  : 
26  ;  84  :  2 ;  1 19  :  81  ;  Songs  5  :  6.  Supposing  this  figu- 
rative, yet  the  figure  is  drawn  from  the  fact  that  the  soul 
can  faint  and  die. 

THE    SOUL   IS    AFFLICTED   BY   FASTING. 

Lev.  16:  29,  31  ;  23 :  27,  29,  32;  Num.  29:  7;  Ps. 
35  :  13  ;  69  :  10  ;  143  :  12 ;  Is.  58  :  3,  5,  10.  Now  as  the 
pious  soul  could  not  be  afflicted  in  mind  by  devotion  to 
God,  it  must  mean  that  the  man  is  faint  for  food.  David 
says  Ps.  109  :  24,  My  knees  are  weak  through  fasting, 
and  my  flesh  faileth  of  fatness.  The  person  is  therefore 
meant  by  the  soul. 

THE  SOUL  CAN  BE  CUT  OFF  AND  DESTROYED. 

This  item,  likewise,  proves  that  the  soul  is  the  person, 
and  is  mortal.  Gen.  7:4,  "  Every  living  substance 
that  I  have  made  will  I  destro^j^''  margin,  blot  out.  In 
Ps.  119 :  139,  cut  off^  is  rendered,  consume ;  in  Exod.  8  : 
9,  Ezek.  7 :  25,  the  same  word,  cut  off^  is  rendered, 
destroy  and  destritction.  In  Isa.  51  :  19  ;  59  :  7  ;  Jer. 
4 :  6,  and  Ezek.  30 :  8,  the  margin  reads  break^  or  break- 
ing^ but  it  is  rendered  destroy  and  destruction.  In  Jer. 
17  :  18,  margin,  break  them  with  a  double  breach  ;  the 
text  reads,  destroy  them  with  a  double  destruction. 
Esth.  3  :  13,  "  The  letters  were  sent  ....  to  destroy^  to 
kill^  and  to  cause  to  perish^  all  Jews.''  From  this  we 
infer,  that  the  terms  blot  out ^  cut  off^  destroy^  broken^  kill^ 
perish^  consume.,  and  destruction.,  are  synonisms,  con- 
veying the  same  idea,  even  in  the  estimation  of  the 
y translators  themselves.  The  soul  that  is  cut  off  and 
destroyed,  perishes,  and  dies  a  corporeal  death.  Now 
if  you  examine  Gen.  17:14;  Exod.  12  :  15, 19  ;  31  :  14 
Lev.  7 :  20,  21,  25,  27  ;  17  :  10,  18,  29  ;  19  :  8  ;  20 :  6 
22  :  3  ;  23  :  29  ;  Numb.  9:13;  15  :  30,  31  ;  19  :  13,  20, 
you  will  find  that  all  these  passages  declare  that  souls 
shall  be  cut  oj}  /  and  once,  utterly  cut  off ;  which  means 


SOULS  UTTERLY  DESTROYED.  59 

the   same   as  to   hlot  out,  erase,  cause  to  perish,  hilly 
destroy,    and   consume   souls.     All   this   destruction   is 
threatened  to  that  soul  who  eats  the  nephesh,  the  soul, 
or  blood,  with  the  flesh,  or  eats  flesh  unlawfully  ;  or, 
that  soul  who  touches  a  dead  soul,  and  does  not  cleanse 
himself ;  or  that  soul  among  the  children  of  Israel,  that 
worked  on  the  sabbath.     These  souls  are  all  charged  with 
bodily  crimes,  and  they  are  threatened  with  bodily  suf- 
fering and  death.     How  dare  we  say,  then,  that  the  soul^ 
is  immortal,  and  cannot  die  the  death  that   Grod  has^ , 
threatened  !     Remember,  if  these  souls  are  ghosts,  tha^ 
only  left  the  body,  and  fled  to  another  world  consciously 
to  exist,  then  they  were  neither  blotted  out,  destroyed, 
nor  consumed. 

Josh.  11:  11,  "  And  he  took  Hazor,  and  smote  all  the 
SOULS  that  were  therein  with  the  edge  of  the  sword, 
utterly  destroying  them,  there  was  not  any  left  to 
breathe."  Do  immortal  souls  breathe,  and  can  they  be 
so  utterly  destroyed  in  a  city,  that  none  are  left  to 
breathe  ?  Who,  unbiassed  by  his  creed,  after  reading 
these  texts,  could  believe  that  souls  only  left  the  body, 
and  fled  to  another  world  ?  Would  the  inspired  writers 
have  used  such  language,  if  the  dogma  of  the  immor- 
tality of  the  soul  were  true  ?  They  teach  the  contrary 
of  such  doctrine  in  verse  14,  and  explain  the  meaning  of 
the  term  soul.  "  The  cattle,  the  children  of  Israel  took 
for  a  prey  unto  themselves  ;  but  every  man  they  smote 
with  the  edge  of  the  sword,  until  they  had  destroyed 
them,  neither  left  they  any  to  breathe."  Thus,  then, 
inspiration  evidently,  and  uniformly  teaches,  that  souls 
are  men,  and  can  he  destroyed.  See  also.  Josh.  10  : 
28-39,  "  Joshua  utterly  destroyed  all  the  souls,  (per- 
sons,) that  were  in  those  cities ;  aye,  and  destroyed 
these  souls  with  the  edge  of  the  sword."  Can  the  sword 
touch  an  intangible,  immaterial  ghost  ? 

Ps.  40  :  14,  "  Let  them  be  ashamed  and  confounded 
together,  that  seek  after  my  soul  to  destroy  ity     Ps.  63  :    , 
9,  "  But  those  who   seek   after  my   soul  to  destroy  it^ 
shall  go  into  the  lower   parts  of  the   earth."  (probabl£/ 
meaning   the    bottom   of  the   grave.)       Ezek.  22  :    25, 
"  There   is   a  conspiracy  of  her  prophets  in  the  midst 
thereof,  like   a   roaring  lion   ravening   the   prey ;  they 
have  devoured  souls  ; they  have  made  her  many 


60  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

widows  in  the  midst  thereof."  The  widows  of  the  8oul», 
or  persons,  they  had  figuratively  devoured.  Verse 
27,  "  Her  princes  in  the  midst  thereof  are  hke  wolves 
ravening  the  prey,  to  shed  blood,  and  to  destroy  souls, 
to  get  dishonest  gain."  See  also^  Lev.  23  :  30  ;  Prov. 
6 :  32  ;  and  Acts  3  :  23.  *'  And  it  shall  come  to  pass 
that  every  {psuche,)  soul^  which  will  not  hear  that 
prophet,  {exolothreuthesetai  ek  tou  laou)  shall  be  utterly 
eo^^ermzTza^e^  out  of  the  people." 

Here  are  thirty-four  declarations,  which  plainly  declare 
that  souls  are  cut  oJQT,  devoured,  destroyed  with  the 
sword,  or  by  some  corporeal-  punishment,  inflicting 
death  and  destruction  :  but  not  a  word  is  said  in  any 
place  what  becomes  of  the  body.  If  these  souls  were 
invisible  and  immortal  ghosts,  that  could  not  be  killed 
and  destroyed  by  any  corporeal  destruction,  but  all  had 
bodies  that  could,  and  were  killed  with  such  destruction, 
would  it  be  consistent  with  the  truth,  for  the  inspired 
writers  to  tell  us  thirty-four  times,  that  it  was  only  the 
ghosts  who  were  thus  destroyed,  when,  in  fact,  it  was 
only  their  bodies,  and  not  their  souls  or  ghosts  at  all  ? 
Those  who  can  beheve  such  glaring  absurdities,  can 
believe  any  thing  that  interested  preachers,  or  corrupted 
tradition,  may  please  to  impose  upon  them.  May  the 
Lord  deliver  them. 

To  the  Devil  and  Satan  is  ascribed,  Eev.  12:9,  and 
20  :  3,  the  "  deceiving  the  whole  earth."  But,  in  Eev. 
13  :  14,  the  Vatican  and  Moscoio  MSS.,  which  are  the 
oldest  and  best,  read,  j^lana  tons  emous  tous  kai.  It 
deceiveth  my  people. 

To  the  False  Prophet,  (the  false  propounder  of  the 
Gospel,)  the  beast  that  rose  out  of  the  sea,  having  seven 
heads  and  ten  horns  is  ascribed,  specially,  ^''the  deceiving 
mine,  or  my  people  ;"  showing  that  the  deceiving  pro- 
pounders  of  false  doctrines,  are  to  be  found  within  the 
pale  of  the  professed  Christian  church  :  so  also,  Eev.  2  : 
20,  "  {Tous  emous  doulous,)  to  teach  and  seduce  my 
servants y  And,  surely,  they  have  been  most  miserably 
deluded  ! 

Eeader ;  will  you  sujBTer  yourself  to  be  thus  deceived 
by  these  teachers  of  false  doctrine,  derived  from  an 
apostate  Church  ?  Exert  the  faculties  that  God  has 
given  you  and  "  try  the  spirits  whether  they  be  of  God.'* 


61 


CHAPTER  V. 


This  proposition  is  diametrically  opposed  to  the  im- 
mortal soul  dogma.  We  shall  first  consider  the  nature 
of  the  penalty  threatened  for  a  breach  of  God's  law. 
Gen.  2:  16,  17,  "  Of  every  tree  of  the  garden,  eatiyig 
thou  shall  eat  /"  translated,  "  thou  mayest  freely  eat ;" 
but  denoting  a  continuance  of  eating,  and  not  a  some- 
thing to  be  completed  in  a  short  time.  "  But  of  the 
tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil,  thou  shalt  not 
eat  of  it :  {ki  hium  akalek  memenu^  niuth  temuth  ;)  for 
from  (or  after)  [the]  day  of  thy  eating  of  it,  dying,  thou 
shalt  die?''  Although  the  most  frequent  meaning  of  the 
h,  prefixed  to  ium^vn hium,  is  in,  yet  this  preposition  has 
many  other  meanings,  and  it  should  always  be  translated 
in  accordance  with  the  context.  Greenfield  gives  to  h 
the  following  variety  of  meanings  :  "  in,  into  ;  on,  upon, 
at,  near  ;  concerning,  out  of,  from  ;  after,  according  to ; 
with,  by  ;  through  ;  to  ;  against ;  among ;  before ;  for, 
on  account  of ;  as  ;  when,  while,  since,  because  :"  so 
that  we  are  fully  justified,  by  the  context,  in  translating 
h,  by  from,  after,  or,  on  account  of,  as  either  of  these 
agree  with  the  context,  while  the  word  in  does  not 
agree.  Some  translate  it  after,  and  quote  Num.  28  :  26, 
where  it  is  prefixed  to  the  word  sebothikam,  which  is 
rendered  "  after  your  weeks  ;"  that  is,  your  weeks  hav- 
ing expired,  "  ye  shall  have  a  holy  convocation."  Sup- 
posing the  prefix,  b,  to  be  rightly  translated,  in,  it  will 
make  no  diflference  in  the  result,  as  the  process  com- 
menced on  that  very  day ;  but  as  the  prefix  b  is  suscep- 


62  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

tible  of  so  great  a  variety  of  interpretations,  we  think 
that  from  J  or  after,  would  be  most  in  accordance  with 
the  context.  Muth  temuth,  "  dying,  thou  shalt  die,"  is 
a  Hteral  translation.  Although  in  some  cases  a  repeti- 
tion of  the  verb  merely  implies  emphasis,  yet,  it  likewise, 
as  in  the  preceding  verse,  "  eating,  thou  shalt  eat,"  im- 
plies continuation,  and  here  denotes  a  process,  which 
God    himself   subsequently    explains    in  Gen.  3:    17; 

"  Because  thou  hast  eaten  of  the  tree cursed  is 

the  ground  for  thy  sake  ;  in  sorrow  shalt  thou  eat  of  it 
all  the  days  of  thy  life,  {i.  e.,  all  the  while  the  penalty  is  in 

V process  till  its  completion,)  ....  in  the  sweat  of  thy  face 
^halt  thou  eat  bread,  till  thou  return  unto  the  grourul  ; 

Jfor  out  of  it  wast  thou  taken  :  for  dust  thou  art,  and 
unto  dust  shalt  thou  return.  And  Jehovah  of  the 
Elohim  said  ....  now,  lest  he  put  forth  his  hand,  and 
take  also  of  the  tree  of  lives,  and  eat,  and  live  for 
EVER  :"  God  drove  out  the  man,  and  guarded  the  tree 
of  lives.  Gen.  5:5,  "  And  ....  Adam  lived  ....  nine 
hundred  and  thirty  years,  and  he  died."  Thus  we  per- 
ceive that  the  penalty  threatened  was  to  end  in  death  ; 
and  God's  interpretation  of  it  plainly  declared,  that  it 
would  result  in  death,  a  gradual  returning  to  the  primi- 
tive elements  of  his  being,  the  dust  ;  and  the  facts  show 
that  it  did  result  in  death,  in  the  entire  extinction  of  his 

■J being.  And  the  Scriptures  do  not  afford  us  a  ray  of 
hope  that  he  will   be   raised   to  life  again  ;  but  declare 

^that  all  who  will  live  for  ever  will  owe  their  entire  being 
to  the  first-born  from  the  dead,  with  an  incorruptible 
nature,  a  second  Adam,  and  great  head  of  all  the  living, 
who  will  impart  "  life  and  incorruptibility"  to  his 
followers  only. 

Thus  we  perceive  that  the  penalty  was  threatened  to 
man  as  a  unit,  comprehended  in  the  appellation  "thou:" 
that  it  contemplated  a  gradual  process,  commencing  in 
the  day  of  transgression  ;  that  in  that  day,  the  whole  of 
the  penalty  was  inflicted,  by  depriving  man  of  the  reno- 
vating effect  of  the  tree  of  lives,  which  would  have 
enabled  him  to  live  for  ever,  notwithstanding  his  mortal 
nature  ;  that  this  penalty  was  inflicted  by  subjecting  man 
to  the  natural  effect  of  his  mortal  nature,  without  a 
counteracting  agent ;  which  subjection  would  necessarily 
result  in  death  ;  that  the  decaying  or  dying  process  was 


THE  PENALTY  OP  SIN.  63 

hastened,  by  cursing  the  ground,  rendering  it  more 
sterile,  and  more  productive  of  weeds,  and  causing  an 
extra  wear  of  the  animal  machinery  by  labor  and  anxiety ; 
and  that  Adam,  as  a  unit^  did  actually  die^  and  RE-turn 
to  the  ground  out  of  which  the  whole  of  the  man  was 
made;  the  breath  that  God  imparted  not  being  hfe 
itself,  but  simply  the  means  of  animating  the  earthy  man. 
If  it  be  contended  that  the  soul  is  the  essential  man, 
then  it  was  the  soul  that  w^as  addressed  by  the  term 
THOU,  and  then  the  soul  suflfered  the  whole  penalty  and 
returned  to  its  native  earth.  But  if  our  readers  are  en- 
tangled in  the  snares  of  theologians,  and  with  them  say, 
man  is  composed  of  a  soul  that  can  live  without  a  body, 
and  a  living  body  ;  or,  as  some  teach,  that  man  has  a 
"  deathless  spirit,"  an  "  immortal  soul,"  and  a  living 
though  mortal  body,  and  therefore  man  is  not  one,  but 
two  or  three  ;  then  we  ask,  which  of  the  three  parts  of 
man  was  addressed  in  the  singular  pronoun  thou  ?  If 
our  readers  say  it  was  the  body  that  was  addressed,  then 
was  the  body  only  involved  in  the  transgression  ;  and 
as  no  law  was  given  to  the  soul  or  spirit,  no  penalty  can 
be  righteously  inflicted  upon  either,  and  so  soul  and 
spirit  necessarily  escape,  and  all  souls  and  spirits  must 
then  be  for  ever  free  from  blame  !  Upon  your  suppo- 
sition, the  soul,  that  was  chiefly  guilty  of  the  transgres- 
sion, escapes  the  infliction  of  the  penalty ;  and  the  body, 
that  was  constituted  subservient  to  the  soul,  endures  the 
whole  penalty,  which  was  death.  Now  if  the  soul  was 
not  meant  in  the  penalty ^  tkov  shall  surely  die^  then  the 
soul  was  not  meant  in  the  prohibition^  (thou  shalt  not 
eat  of  it,)  for  these  are  the  preceding  words.  But  the 
thou  in  each  case  means  the  whole  person  ;  for  it  would 
have  been  absurd  to  forbid  a  ghost  to  eat,  or  touch  the 
fruit  of  a  tree.  It  is  plain,  therefore,  that  no  soul,  or 
spirit,  or  ghost,  that  can  live  abstracted  from  the  body, 
was  involved  in  either  the  prohibition  or  the  penalty  ; 
and  therefore  no  ghost  sinned  in  the  case,  and  no  ghost 
fell.  Why,  therefore,  do  ye  kindle  the  fires  of  endless 
misery,  to  torment  the  unfallen,  sinless  soul  ?  But  if 
you  will  still  contend,  that  Adam's  ghost  sinned,  and 
that  only  his  body  died,  then  we  say,  that  the  "  thou'^^ 
was  addressed  to  the  ghost,  both  in  the  threatening,  and 
in  the  execution,  and  the   twice  repeated  thou — "  Dust 


64  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

thou  art,  and  unto  dust  shalt  tlwu  return  ;''  implies  that 
the  ghost  addressed   was   made  of  dust,  and  returned 
again  to  dust.     But  the  simple  fact  is,  that  the  same 
man  that  became  a  hving  creature,  (soul  or  person,)  in 
Gen.  2 :  7,  is  the  very  same  living  soul  or  creature,  that 
was  prohibited  the  tree  of  knowledge,  and  threatened  in 
verse  17,  and  was  the  same  living  soul  or   person,  that 
^/sinned  and  turned   to   dust ;  "  For  the  wages  of  sin  is 
p/death,"  and  not   everlasting  life   in  hell,  or   any   other 
^place.     Ezek.  18:4,  "  For  the  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall 
die."     Adam  lies  under  the  full  infliction  of  the  penalty, 
in  the  shape  of  dust,  unconscious  in  the  grave.     He  has 
already  received   the   whole   amount  of  the  penalty, — ■ 
death — the  extinction  of  conscious   being;  and  if  there 
should   be  no  resurrection,  then   Adam   will   never  be 
^/conscious  again  ;  for  all  future  life  is  dependent  upon  a 
/resurrection  from  the  dead.     But  the  resurrection  is  a 
part  of  a  remedial  system,  introduced  through  Christ,  at 
a  subsequent  period ;  and  is  no  way  connected  with  the 
law  that  was  given  to  Adam,  which  said,  in  effect,  obey 
and  live — ^transgress  and  die.     Thus,  then,  the  remedy 
'   does  not   interfere  with  the   infliction  of  the   penalty  of 
sin ;  and  "  every  transgression  and  disobedience  receives 
its  just  recompense  of  reward,"  and  "  God  is  just,  and 
yet  the  justifier   of  him  that   believeth  in  Jesus."     He 
executes  the  full  penalty,  and  yet  "justifies  the  ungodhf^ 
who  take  hold  of  the  hope  set  before  them,  of  the  resur- 
rection from  the  dead. 
'  -^"That  the  penalty  of  the  law  is  death,  the  extinction  ot 
VJar^ing,  is  the  uniform  testimony  of  Scripture  throughout 
the  Bible ;  though  the  devil  and  some  preachers  agree 
in  contradicting  God,  by  saying  to  souls,  "  Ye  shall  not 
surely  die,"  in  the  only  sense  in  w^hich  death  is  threaten- 

/ed  by  God,  the  extinction  of  being,  the  "  being  as  though 
they  had  not  been."  "  Ye  shall  not  surely  die,"  was  the 
^^erpent's  first  lie^  the  lie  by  which  he  deceived  Eve  ;  and 
every  preacher,  after  having  studied  the  subject,  that  still 
continues  to  preach  the  same  dogma,  for  the  sake  of  the 
loaves  and  fishes,  and  popularity,  and' resists  the  truth,  is 
giving  currency  to  a  lie  that  is  sapping  the  very  founda- 
tions of  Christianity ;  is  countenancing  and  encouraging 
infidelity ;  and  is  verily  guilty  in  the  sight  of  God. 
By  comparing  Ex.  31 :  14,  15,  with  Num.  15;  32-355 


THE   PENALTY   OP   SIN.  65 

you  will  plainly  perceive  that  the  soul  that  did  any  man- 
ner of  work  on  the  Sabbath — ^he  was  to  be  stoned  to 
death  by  the  people.  So  there  is  such  a  thing  as  a  dead 
soul^  as  we  have  proved  and  shall  continue  to  prove.  If 
Adam  was  a  living  soul,  while  the  breath  of  hves  was  in 
his  nostrils^  then  he  was  a  dead  soul  when  he  ceased  to 
breathe  the  breath  of  lives.  The  very  phrase  "  living 
soul,"  imphes  a  lifeless  soul,  and  it  would  be  superfluous 
to  add  living  soul,  if  there  were  no  such  thing  as  a  dead 
soul.  And  God  is  called  the  living  God,  to  distinguish 
him  from  the  dead  gods,  that  can  neither  see,  hear,  nor 
talk.  Ps.  115:  4-8. 
Job  3 :  20,  23,  says — 

*'  Why  should  light  be  vouchsafed  to  the  miserable, 

And  life  (chayah)  unto  the  bitter  soul  1  (nephesh,) 

Who  wait  for  death,  but  it  comes  not, 

And  search  for  it  more  than  for  hidden  treasures  ; 

Who  rejoice  over  a  tumulus, 

And  exult  when  they  can  find  a  grave." 

Here  the  bitter  or  distressed  soul  waits  for  death, 
which  proves  that  it  expected  to  die.  The  translators  of 
the  common  version  have  officiously  inserted  an  m  between 
bitter  and  soul.  Was  this  to  disguise  its  meaning,  and 
hide  the  death  of  the  soul  ?  Job  7:15,  My  soul  chooses 
strangling,  death  rather  than  life-  Ah,  Job,  the  pagan 
fable  of  the  separate  existence  of  the  soul  was  not  known 
and  beUeved  by  thee,  else  thou  wouldst  not  have  sup- 
posed that  thy  soiil  could  be  strangled  !  !  Gen.  12  :  12- 
19.  Here  Abraham  makes  "  me"  and  "  my  soul"  iden- 
tical, and  he  and  Sarah  prevaricate  some  that  his  soul 
might  live  and  not  be  killed  by  the  Egyptians.  In  Gen. 
19:  17-20,  Lot  makes  /,  and  my  soul  the  same  person, 
and  said  his  soul  should  live^  if  he  fled  out  of  Sodom  to 
Zoar,  which  implied  that  his  soul  would  have  died  in  the 
destruction  of  Sodom  if  he  had  not  fled.  Ps.  78  :  50,  51, 
"  He  spared  not  their  (nephesh)  souls  from  death,  but 
gave  their  {chayah)  life  over  to  the  pestilence,  and  smote 
all  the  first  born  of  Egypt."  This  proves  that  the  souls 
of  the  first  born  of  Egypt  died  with  the  pestilence.  Pb. 
22  :  2,  Deliver  my  soul  from  the  sword,  my  soul  from  the 
hand  of  the  dog.  Can  the  sword  reach  the  immaterial 
ghost  ?    Ps.  7:2,"  Lest  he  (a  man)  tear  my  soul  like  a 


ly^ 


66  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

lion,  rending  it  in  pieces.*'  So  this  "  simple,  uncompound- 
ed,  indivisible,  immateriaP'  soul^  can  be  separated,  and 
torn  in  pieces.  Job  18:4.  "  He  teareth  his  soul  in  his  an- 
ger." Here,  as  it  were,  to  disguise  the  truth,  the  soulis 
translated  himself.  When  the  Philistines  took  David  in 
Gath,  and  there  unexpectedly  saved  his  life,  he  exclaimed, 
Ps.  56  :  13,  "  Thou  hast  delivered  my  sotd  from  death?^ 
Ps.  116  :  8,  reads  the  same.  Jer.  38 :  17,  "  Thus  saith 
the  Lord.  .  .1^  thou  wilt  assuredly  go  forth  unto  the  king 
of  Babylon's  princes,  then  thy  soul  shall  live^  and  this 
city  shall  not  be  burned  with  fire ;  and  thou  shalt  live^ 
and  thy  house."  Here,  "  thou  shalt  live,"  and,  "thy 
soul  shall  live,"  are  synoyomous  expressions.  Job  24  : 
12,  "  Men  groan  from  out  of  the  city,  and  the  soul  of  the 
wounded  crieth  out."  If  the  soul  be  a  ghost ^  then  we 
may  read  Ez.  13  :  18-20  thus  :  "  Wo  to  the  women  that 
sew  pillows  to  all  arm-holes,  and  make  kerchiefs  upon 
the  head  of  every  stature  to  hxmt  gJiosts  I  Will  ye  hunt 
the  ghosts  of  my  people,  and  will  ye  save  the  ghosts  alive 
that  come  unto  you  ?  and  will  ye  pollute  me  among  my 
people  for  handfuls  of  barley  and  for  pieces  of  bread,  to 
slay  the  ghosts  that  should  not  die^  and  to  save  the  ghosts 
alive  that  should  not  live^  by  your  lying  to  my  people 
that  hear  your  lies  ?  Wherefore  thus  saith  the  Lord 
God ;  Behold  I  am  against  your  pillow^s,  wherewith  ye 
there  hunt  the  ghosts  to  make  them  fly,  and  I  will  tear 
them  from  your  arms,  and  will  let  the  gJwsts  go,  even  the 
ghosts  that  ye  hunt  to  make  them  fly."  What  an  ab- 
surdity is  this ;  here  nephesh  occurs  eight  times,  and  is 
Jdlled  and  saved  alive ;  and  if  nephesh  ever  means  an 
immortal  soul,  or  ghost,  surely  the  translators  should 
have  know^n  better  than  to  translate  it  by  the  word  soul^ 
in  any  of  these  places.  In  Jer.  2  :  34.  "  Also  in  thy 
skirts  is  found  the  blood  of  the  souls  of  the  poor  inno- 
cents." As  the  souls  have  blood  to  shed,  it  must  be  the 
persons  themselves.  So  John  in  Rev.  6  : 9,  saw  in  vision  un- 
der the  altar,  the  souls  (or  persons)  that  were  slain  for 
the  word  of  God,  and  their  cry  was,  hke  the  cry  of  the 
blood  of  righteous  Abel,  How  long  dost  thou  not  judge 
and  avenge  our  blood,  our  death,  on  them  that  dwell 
upon  the  earth?  But  these  souls  were  persons  who  had 
blood  which  was  shed,  and  the  murder  of  them  is  charged 
upon  the  dwellers  upon  the  earth.     Oould  the  death  of 


THE  SOUL  ENTERS  THE  GRAVE.  67 

never-dying  souls  be  consistently  charged  upon  the  mur- 
derers of  souls  ?   Eev.  16:3,"  And  every  living  soul  died 
in  the  sea."     We  suppose  the  souls  were  the  ghosts  of 
the  fishes ;  yea,  we  mean  the  fishes  themselves;  for  it 
was  the  result  of  the  water  becoming  blood.     And  per- 
haps so  thought  the  translators,  for  in  Isa.  19  :  10,  they 
have   rendered   the  word   nephesh,  fish.      In   the  mar- 
gin they  say,  '^  living  things^     Why  did  they  hide  the 
word  souls  ?     They  knew  that  the  word  nephesh^  when 
plural,  meant  simply  creatures, whether  dead  or  alive 
whether  fish  or  men.     You  may  read   also  Jer.  4:10 
Num.   1 1  ;  6 ;  Job   10  :  1 ;  30  :  15,  16 ;  Ps.  19  :  13 ;  31 
9  ;  33  :  19  ;  86  :  13,   14  ;   1 19  :  20,  25,  28  ;  Isa.  55  :  3,  5 
Jer.  4:31;  Ez.  18  :  4,  20,  27  ;  33  :  5,  9.     Here  are  forty^ 
two  texts  in  which  iiephesh  and  psuche^  are  rendered  soul. 
And  thus  it  is  evident  that  the  translators  knew  that  soul 
meant  creature  or  person  in  these  places,  and  if  in  these, 
80  in  all  others. 

THE    SOUL    ENTERS    THE    GRAVE. 

The  following  passages  place  the  soul  in  the  hand  or 
power  of  the  grave.  In  Ps.  49  :  8,  9,  our  version  reads, 
"  For  the  redemption  of  the  soul  is  precious,  and  it 
ceaseth  for  ever :  that  he  should  still  live  for  ever,  and 
not  see  corruption."  Let  us  put  the  construction  upon 
it  the  Hebrew  requires.  Verse  7,  "  None  of  those  (that 
trust  in  their  wealth)  can  by  any  means  redeem  his  bro- 
ther (from  the  grave,)  nor  give  to  God  a  ransom  for  him. 
For  the  redemption  of  his  soul  (from  the  grave)  is  pre- 
cious, but  such  a  redemption  ceaseth  for  ever  :  that  he 
(his  soul)  should  still  live  for  ever  and  not  see  corruption." 
Such  a  redemption  from  the  grave  was  never  provided 
for  man  ;  the  sentence  dust  thou  art  and  unto  dust  shalt 
thou  return,  passes  upon  all  men,  and  their  souls  see  cor- 
ruption, yea  the  soul  enters  the  house  appointed  for  all 
the  living.  That  the  soul  experiences  corruption  is  like- 
wise evident  from  verse  14.  ^''  Like  sheep  they  are  laid 
in  the  grave  ;  death  shall  feed  on  them  ;  and  the  upright 
shall  have  dominion  over  them  in  the  morning  (of  the 
resurrection;)  and  their  beauty  shall  consume  in  the 
grave  from  their  dwelHng.  But  Grod  will  redeem  my 
soul  from  the  power  of  the  grave  (from  the  hand  of 


68  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

sheol:)  for  he  shall  receive  mey  Ps.  89:  48,  "  What 
man  is  he  that  liveth,  and  shall  not  see  death  ?  shall  he 
dehver  his  soul  from  the  hand  of  the  grave  ?"  The 
question  imphes  an  impossibihty.  In  Job  33  :  18-21,  we 
have  a  description  of  a  dying  man.  (God)  "  keepeth  back 
his  {nephesh)  soul  from  the  {shakhath)  pit,  or  grave,  and 
his  [chayah)  life  from  perishing  by  the  sword.  He  is 
chastened  also  with  pain  upon  his  bed  (and  the  racking 
of  his  bones  is  incessant :)  so  that  his  {chayah)  life  abhor- 
reth  bread,  and  his  {nephesh)  soul  dainty  food  ;....yea,  his 
{nephesh)  soul  draw^eth  nigh  unto  {kever)  t\\Q  grave^  and 
his  (chayah)  life  to  the  destroyer  or  to  the  (mimtheem) 
mortal  diseases.''''  Jer.  16  :  4  ;  Ezk.  18  :  8,  illustrate  this. 
But  the  man  is  unexpectedly  restored  to  health  again. 
Verse  23,  "  If  there  be  a  messenger  with  him,  an  inter- 
preter, one  among  a  thousand,  to  point  out  to  man  his 
right  course:  then  he  is  gracious  unto  him  and  saith, 
Deliver  him  from  going  down  to  the  {shokhath)  pit :  I 
have  found  a  ransom.  His  flesh  shall  be  fresher  than  a 
child's  :  he  shall  return  to  the  days  of  his  youth.... Verse 
28,  He  will  redeem  his  soul  from  going  into  the  {shok- 
hath) pit,  and  his  hfe  shall  appear  in  the  light  [a  little 
longer].  Lo,  all  these  things  worketh  God  oftentimes 
with  man,  to  bring  back  his  {nephesh)  soul  from  the  pit, 
to  be  enlightened  with  the  light  of  the  livingy  The 
word  shokhath  seems  to  imply  destruction  in  a  deep"  pit, 
or  gi'ave.  Here  the  soul  is  represented  as  being  liable 
to  destruction  in  the  grave,  and  to  deliver  him  from  the 
grave,  and  to  deliver  his  soul  from  the  grave  are  equiva- 
lent expressions.  Moreover  we  find  the  difference  be- 
tween kevei'  and  sheol :  certain  souls  are  buried  in  the 
kever ^  or  grave ;  all  souls  are  not  buried  in  graves  ;  but 
all  souls  go  into  sheol^  the  state  of  death.  So  was  the 
soul  of  Hezekiah  delivered.  Isa.  38  :  17,  "  Thou  hast  in 
love  to  my  soul  delivered  k  from  {shokhath)  the  pit  of 
corruption."  This  is  equal  to  saying  thou  hast  delivered 
my  soul  from  being  destroyed  in  the  grave  by  corruption. 
So  in  Jonah  2:  2,  6,  7,  ''  Out  of  the  belly  of  {sheol)  the 
grave  [translated  hell\  cried  I,  and  thou  heardest  my 
voice  :...thou  hast  brought  up  my  life  from  corruption, 
O  Lord,  my  God  :  When  my  soul  fainted  within  me."... 
In  the  same  sense  was  the  soul  of  David,  or  David  hi7n- 
^dfy  for  they  are  one,  often  snatched  from  the  grave.     See 


Christ's  soul  died.  69 

Ps.  30  :  2,  3  ;  31 :  9,  10  ;  88  :  3  ;  9:17;  33  :  19 ;  37 :  7. 
Likewise  see  Jer.  18:20.  Job  says,  24:  19;  30:23, 
"  The  graves  consume  all  that  have  sinned.  I  know  that  \/^ 
thou  wilt  bring  me  to  death,  and  to  the  house  appointed  i^"^^ 
for  all  the  living."  If  the  soul  sinSy  or  the  soul  lives j  then  K 
will  it  be  consumed  in  the  grave.  Is.  10  :  17,  18,  "  And 
the  light  of  Israel  shall  be  for  a  fire,  and  his  Holy  One 
for  a  flame  :  and  it  shall  burn  and  devour  his  thorns  and 
his  briers  in  one  day  ;  and  shall  consume  the  glory  of 
his  forest,  and  of  his  fruitful  field,  both  soul  and  body,  or 
from  the  soul  even  to  the  flesh."  The  wicked  as  thorns 
and  briers  are  burned  up,  their  lives  and  being,  are  des- 
troyed. We  have  referred  you  to  sixty  texts  where  the 
soul  and  life  are  destroyed,  or  liable  to  be  destroyed  in 
the  grave.  But  if  soul  and  Hfe  be  an  undying  ghost, 
then  are  these  expressions  extreme  absurdities ;  and  there- 
fore the  nephesh  and  the  chayah  always  refer  to  the  per- 
sons themselves  as  a  unit. 

THE  SOUL  OF  CHRIST  WAS  SACRIFICED  IN  DEATH. 

Let  us  reverently  consider  the  import  of  the  expres- 
sion; ''  Christ  poured  out  his  soul  unto  death  :"  for  if  ye 
believe  not  that  Chrif^  died,  and  rose  again,  "  Ye  are  yet 
in  your  sins"  ;  and  of  course  will  die,  and  remain  under 
the  dominion  of  death  in  utter  unconsciousness  for  ever! 
1  Cor.  15.  Can  a  believer  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul, 
believe  that  Christ  died  ?  He  may  affirm  it ;  but  he 
does  not  believe  it.  Ask  him.  Did  Christ  die?  "  Yes." 
Did  his  soul  die  ?  "  Why — ^yes,  his  soul  was  made  an 
offering  for  sin."  No  prevarication,  sir,  Did  the  Holy  One, 
Jesus  Christ  himself,  die  ?  "  Certainly  not ;  his  body 
died,  but  his  soul  went  to  Paradise ;  for  if  Christ  him- 
self had  died,  the  universe  would  have  fallen  to  pieces"  !  ! 
Then  you  do  not  believe  that  God  gave  his  Son  to  die, 
but  only  a  body  that  was  an  encumbrance  to  the  soul, 
and  Jesus  was  not  raised  again  from  the  dead,  but  only 
his  body ! !  Alas  !  alas!  for  orthodoxy ! !  1  Thess.  4:14, 
"  If  we  believe  that  Christ  died,  and  rose  again  ;  even  so 
also,  through  Jesus,  will  God  bring  with  Jesus  [from  the 
dead  all]  them  that  sleep  in  himy  Heb.  13:  20,  But 
may — ^'  The  God  of  peace,  that  brought  again  from  the 
dead  our  Lord  JesuSy  that  great  shepherd  of  the  sheep, 


70  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

through  the  blood  of  the  everlasting  covenant,  make  you 
perfect  in  every  good  work  to  do  his  will." 

1  Thess.  5:9,"  For  God  hath  not  appointed  us  to 
wrath,  but  to  the  acquisition  of  life,  by  our  Lord  Jesus 
the  Messiah  ;  who  died  for  us,  that  whether  we  wake  or 
sleep,  we  might  hve  together  with  him."  Col.  3 :  3, 
"  For  ye  are  dead  [that  is,  subject  to  death ;]  and  your 
life  is  hidden  with  the  Messiah  in  God  :  and  when  the 
Messiah,  who  is  our  source  of  life^  shall  be  manifested, 
THEN  shall  ye  also  be  manifested  with  him  in  glory." 

This  last  we  quote  from  Murdock's  translation  of  the 
Syriac,  which  is  the  oldest  version  extant,  and  which  is 
very  much  like  the  language  the  Saviour  himself  used, 
which  was  the  Chaldee  Syriac.  The  words  save  and 
salvation^  are  nearly  in  all  cases  throughout  the  Syriac 
expressed  by  words  which  signify  "  to  live,"  and  "  have 
life,"  which  expressions  harmonize  throughout,  proving 
an  identity  of  meaning. 

Isa.  53  :  10,  "  When  thou  shalt  make  his  soul  an  offer- 
ing for  sin."  His  soul  could  not  have  been  made  an 
offering  for  sin  unless  it  were  slain  as  the  types  were. 
See  Lev.  1  :  4-15.  Every  animal  that  was  brought  for 
an  offering,  was  slain  at  the  altar  before  the  Lord.  Gen. 
22  :  2,  God  said  to  Abraham,  "  Take  now  thy  son,  thy 
only  son  Isaac,  whom  thou  lovest,  and  get  thee  into  the 
land  of  Moriah,  and  offer  him  there  for  a  burnt  offering 
upon  one  of  the  mountains  which  I  will  tell  thee  of... 
And  Abraham... bound  Isaac,  his  son,  and  laid  him  on  the 
altar.. .and  took  the  knife  to  slay  his  son."  But  no,  Abra- 
ham ;  "  God  will  provide  himself  a  lamb  for  a  burnt  of- 
fering,.. Audi  Abraham  went  and  took  the  ram,  and  offer- 
ed him  up  for  a  burnt  offering  instead  of  his  son."  Isa. 
53  :  11,  "  He  shall  see  of  the  travail  of  his  soul.''^  Isa. 
53  :  12,  "Because  he  hath  poured  out  Ins  soul  unto  deaths 
In  the  face  of  this  plain  declaration,  who  shall  dare  to 
tell  us  that  the  soul  of  Christ  did  not  die  ?  We  believe 
the  Bible,  and  we  find  it  plainly  recorded.  Mat.  26  :  38, 
Mark  14 :  34,  "  My  soul  is  exceedingly  sorrowful  (how 
much  ?)  even  unto  death.''  Mat.  20  :  28,  Mark  10  :  45, 
"  Even  as  the  Son  of  Man  came,  not  to  be  ministered 
unto,  but  to  minister,  and  to  give  his  (psuche)  soul  a  ran- 
som for  many."  John  10 :  10, "  I  am  come  that  they  might 
have  zoen^  hfe,  and  that  they  might  have  it  more  abun- 


Christ's  soul  died.  71 

dantly."  Verse  11,  '*The  good  shepherd  giveth  his 
psiiche^  soul^  for  the  sheep."  15  v,  ''  I  lay  down  mj 
psuche^  soul,  for  the  sheep."  Verse  17,  18,  ''  Therefore 
doth  my  Father  love  me,  because  I  lay  down  mypsucke, 
my  life,  my  being,  that  I  might  take  it  again.  No  man 
taketh  it  from  me,  but  I  lay  it  down  of  myself  I  have 
power  to  lay  it  down,  and  I  have  powder  to  take  it  again." 
15  :  13,  "  Greater  love  hath  no  man  than  this,  that  a  man 
lay  dow^n  his  psuche,  his  hfe,  or  being  for  his  friends." 
Thus  the  words  of  Christ  correspond  w^ith  the  prophet  in 
that  important  truth.  That  his  soul  w^as  made  a  legal 
oftering  for  sin. 

John  sets  his  seal  to  this  truth,  1  John  3  :  16,  "  In  this 
we  recognize  his  love,  because  he  laid  down  his  psuche, 
soul,  or  being,  for  us  ;  and  w^e  ought  to  lay  down  our 
psuchcj  souls,  or  being,  for  the  brethren."  Do  any  say 
thsit  psuche  means  life  in  these  places  ?  We  affirm  that 
it  only  means  life  as  being  the  essential  attribute  of  the 
soul,  without  which  the  soul  is  dead,  and  is  worthless. 
In  the  corresponding  places  in  Luke,  who  wrote  in  purer 
Greek,  and  avioided  these  Hebrew  idioms,  in  the  place  of 
psuche^  he  writes,  Christ  gave  himself. 

Acts  3  :  15,  "  Ye  killed  the  archeyon  tes  zoes^  author 
of  life,  whom  God  hath  raised  from  the  dead."  Killed 
the  origin  of  the  everlasting  life  of  the  saints.  Does  not 
this  text  prove  that  something  more  than  a  body^  or  even 
of  a  man  merely,  was  killed  and  raised  again  from  the 
dead?  1  Pet.  3  :  18,  "  Christ  was  put  to  death  in  the 
flesh."  Observe,  it  does  not  read  that  the  flesh  was  put 
to  death,  which  is  also  true;  but  Christ  was  put  to 
death,  as  partaking  of  a  corruptible  nature,  but  was 
raised  an  illustration  or  a  pattern  of  the  life  and  incorrup- 
tion  which  is  the  main  hope  of  the  gospel ;  see  2  Tim.  1  : 
10.  Eead  Eph.  4:10,  "  He  that  descended^  is  the  same 
that  ascended  up  far  above  all  the  heavens  (or  atmos- 
pheres,) that  he  might  fill  all  things."  Verse  9,  "  He 
first  descended  into  the  lower  parts  of  the  earth?''  Though 
the  lower  parts  of  the  earth  may  sometimes  mean  sea- 
coasts  and  valleys,  as  in  Isa.  44  :  23,  and  the  mother's 
womb,  as  Ps.  139  :  15  ;  or  perhaps  the  mother  earthy  yet 
the  phrase  sometimes  means  the  state  of  the  dead,  or 
grave,  as  in  Ps.  63  :  9,  and  Eph.  4  :  9.  And  whereas 
David,  Peter  and  Paul  all  declare  that  Jesus  did  descend 


72  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

into  the  grave,  if  you  deny  that  the  soul  of  Christ  first 
descended  into  the  lower  parts  of  the  earthy  or  the  grave^ 
then  to  be  consistent,  you  must  hkewise  deny,  that  the 
soul  of  Christ  ascended  ;  for  the  same  soul  or  person  that 
ascended, ^7*5^  descended:  so  what  of  Christ  descended* 
the  same  only  ascended. 

But  that  Christ  himself,  yea  the  soul  of  Christ,  de- 
scended into  the  grave  is  evident  from  many  passages  of 
Scripture.  Ps.  16:9,  "  My  flesh  also  shall  rest  in  hope. 
For  thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul^  in  sheol^  [the  grave^  or 
state  of  the  dead ;]  neither  wilt  thou  suffer  thy  Holy 
One  to  see  corruption."  [But]  "  thou  wilt  show  me  the 
path  of  life."  In  Acts  2:  26,  Peter,  commenting  upon 
this  passage,  tells  us  that  David  spake  this  of  Christ, 
quoting  his  very  words,  "  Moreover  also  my  flesh  shall 
rest  in  hope  :  because  thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in 
hades ^  (the  grave,  or  state  of  the  dead ;)  neither  wilt  thou 
suffer  thine  Holy  One  to  see  corruption.  Thou  hast 
made  known  to  me  the  ways  of  Hfe."  Evidently  imply- 
ing that  the  only  way  to  obtain  permanent  life  was  to  be 
raised  again  from  the  dead  with  an  incorruptible  and 
therefore  an  immortal  nature.  Peter  goes  on  and  com- 
pares and  contrasts  the  death  of  David  with  the  death  of 
Christ.  Verse  29,  "  The  patriarch  David,  [equal  to  the 
soul  of  David,]  is  both  dead  and  buried,  and  his  sepul- 
chre is  with  us  to  this  day"  ;  implying  that  you  may  see 
for  yourselves,  that  David  himself  is  still  in  his  grave. 
Verse  34,  '^  For  David  is  not  ascended  into  the  heavens." 
Verse  30,  "  Therefore.. ..knowing  that  God. ...would  raise 
up  Christ  to  sit  on  his  throne ;  he  seeing  this  before, 
spake  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  that  his  soul  was  not 
left  in  hades ^  neither  his  flesh  did  see  corruption.  This 
Jesus  hath  God  raised  up."  Verse  36,  "  Let  all.. .know 
assuredly,  that  God  hath  made  that  same  Jesus,  whom 
ye  have  crucified,  both  Lord  and  Christ."  Paul  comments 
further  on  David's  expressions :  Acts  13  :  28,  "  Though 
they  found  no  cause  of  death  [in  Christ,]  yet  they  desired 
Pilate  that  he  should  be  slain.  And  when  they  had  fulfill- 
ed all  that  was  written  of  him^  they  took  him  down  from 
the  tree,  and  laid  him  in  a  sepulchre.  But  God  raised 
him  from  the  dead."  He  declared  that  God  had  fulfilled 
the  promise  made  to  the  fathers  and  "  hath  raised  up 
Jestcs  again  ;  as  it  is  written  in  the  second  Psalm,  Thou 


73 

art  my  son,  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee"  [from  the 
dead].  "  And  as  concerning  that  he  raided  him  up  from 
the  deadj  now  no  more  to  return  [to  a  corruptible  &tat«;] 
he  said  on  this  wise,  I  will  give  you  the  sure  mercies  of 
David.  Wherefore  he  saith  also  in  another*  psalm, 
'^'Thoushalt  not  suffer  thine  ^o/y  ^^^to  see  corruption.' 
For  David,  after  he  had  served  his  ow^n  generation  by 
the  will  of  God,  fell  on  slee^^  and  saw  corrugation  ,*  but 
HE  whom  God  raised  again  saw  no  corruption."  Now 
mark  tw^o  points  ;  both  Christ  and  David  died  ;  and  both 
were  buried  in  the  grave  ;  but  while  the  soul  of  David, 
or  David  himself,  is  sleeping  in  the  grave  in  a  state  of 
corruption,  waiting  for  Christ  to  descend  again  6x)m  hea- 
ven, to  wake  the  dead  -,  the  soul  of  Christ,  or  Christ  him- 
self, was  raised  from  the  dead.  But  for  this,  the  soul  of 
Ohrist,  w^hich  David  makes  to  be  the  same  as  the  Holy 
One,  or  himself,  would  have  experienced  corruption.  If 
the  reader  does  not  plainly  perceive  this,  he  has  reason 
to  suspect  that  the  veil  of  tradition  has  beclouded  his 
eyes. 

The  apostles  make  the  sheol  of  the  Old  Testament 
to  correspond  with  the  hades  of  the  New  :  both  meaning 
the  grave^  or  the  state  of  death.  The  grave  being  a  particu- 
lar expression  ^  the  state  of  death  a  general  one.  Some 
souls  are  placed  in  graves,  while  all  souls  go  to  sheol  or 
hades^  the  state  of  death.  The  souls  of  both  righteous 
snd  wicked  go  to  sheol.  Dare  the  learned  deny  that 
sheol  is  thirty  times  translated  the  -grave  ?  The  Scrip- 
tures say,  Ecc.  9  :  10,  ^^  There  is  no  woi'k,  nor  device, 
nor  wisdom,  in  sheol ^  whither  thou  goest."  Here  sheol 
is  justly  rendered  grofce ;  but  in  Ps.  16,  and  Acts  2, 
sheol  and  hades^  are  shamefully  rendered  hell ;  a  word 
til  at,  as  it  is  now  understood,  completely  obscures  the 
true  meaning  1 !  Was  this  done  to  hide  the  fact  that  the 
soul  of  Christ  died^  and  entered  the  grave  ?  The  idea  of 
placing  the  soul  of  Christ  in  the  hell,  that  has  the  cur- 
rent theological  definition  attached  to  it,  if  it  be  done 
wilfully,  is  consummate  blasphemy  i  !  As  the  apostles 
leave  the  soul  of  David  in  sheol^  or  hades^  therefore,  ac- 
cording to  current  theology,  the  pious  patriarch  is  still 
in  a  hell  of  fire  ! !  But  th«  Popish  priests,  sanctioned  by 
Protestant  orthodoxy,  had  invented  the  dogma  of  the 
separate  existence  of  the  soul,  and  consequently  must 


74  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

find  places  to  put  them.  Hence,  the  inventioB  of  tbe 
Popish  hell,  and  hmbo,  and  purgatory,  and  a  fabled 
place  called  heaven ;  and  hkewi&e  the  Protestant  "  hell/' 
and  the  poetical  "spirit  land,"  and  a  heaven  "beyond 
the  bounds  of  time  and  space"  !  !  Full  well  do  ye  follow 
the  traditions  of  your  fathers.  Well  may  you  call  the 
Church  of  Eome,  the  mother  church  ;  and  by  following 
her  cunningly  devised  fables,  too  truly  do  ye  prove  your- 
selves to  be  the  legitimate  daughters  of  the  mother  ot 
harlots !  ! !  The  false  prophets,  or  the  false  propounders 
of  doctrine,  that  should  deceive  God's  people. 

While  some  disdain  the  Bible  truths  that  the  soul  of 
Christ  was  "  poured  out  unto  death^''  they  startle  not  at 
the  idea  of  pouring  his  soul  into  a  hell  of  fire  !  Never- 
theless, the  Spirit  has  said  expressly,  that  "  his  soul  was 
made  an  offering  for  sin,"  "  his  soul  was  exceedingly 
sorrowful,  even  unto  death."  It  is  the  death  of  the  soul 
of  Christ,  or  of  Christ  himself^  that  was  the  ransom  price 
for  the  redemption  of  the  souls  of  men,  and  the  means 
of  reconciling  our  souls  to  God.  For  says  Christ,  "  / 
am  he  that  was  dead^  and  am  alive,  and  behold  I  live 
for  evermore."  If  the  soul  of  Christ  did  not  die,  then, 
are  the  souls  of  all  men  left  without  a  propitiatory  sacri- 
fice ;  for  the  law  demanded  nepheshfor  nephesh^  soul  for 
soul^  eye  for  eye,  hand  for  hand  ;"  Deut.  19  :  21.  Why 
did  inspiration  use  the  word  soul  of  Christ,  if  the  body 
only,  separated  from  the  essential  mind  and  still  living 
principle,  or  soul,  was  really  meant  ?  The  Vulgate 
reads,  1  John  4:3,  "  Every  spirit  that  dissolveth  Jesus, 
is  not  of  God."  Dissolveth  Jesus — ^but  ye  separate  him 
into  four  or  five  parts  during  his  stay  in  the  grave 
Some  of  you  say,  that,  L  a  part  of  Jesus  remained  alive, 
superintending  the  machinery  of  the  universe  :  2.  a  part 
of  Jesus  went  ahve  with  the  thief  into  Paradise  :  3.  a 
part  of  Jesus  went  alive  into  hell,  and  preached  to  the 
prisoners  there  :  while,  4.  another  part,  the  body,  lay 
unconscious  in  the  tomb.  Some  others  might  add,  5. 
that  the  spirit  of  Jesus,  as  a  living  entity,  went  to  his 
Father  in  heaven.  Thus  you  dissolve  Jesus,  and  sepa- 
rate him  into  four  or  five  parts  ;  and  if  this  were  so, 
the  Apostle,  instead  of  sapng  that  Christ  diedj  should 
mend  his  expression,  and  say,  that  one  part  only  out  of 
four,  and  that  the  least  valuable  part,  died.     Away  with 


Christ's  soul  died.  75 

such  manifest  perversions  of  Scripture  and  common 
sense.  Foolish  men,  who  hath  bewitched  you  that  ye 
should  not  receive  the  truth,  that  Jesus  Christ  has  been 
evidently  set  forth  as  crucified  among  you  ?  Not  a 
part  only  crucified,  but  Christ  died,  and  Christ  was 
buried^  and  Christ  was  raised, 

THE  PHRASE,  "  DEAD  SOUL,'*  IS  OP  FREQUENT  OCCURRENCE 
IN  THE  HEBREW  SCRIPTURES. 

We  intend  that  the  following  texts  shall  form  a  sort 
of  top-stone,  binding  together,  and  crowning  our  pre- 
ceding arguments.  They  will  conclusively  prove  that 
the  boasted  "  immortal  soul,"  is  but  a  mortal  thing  aftei 
all ;  meaning  only  the  person  himself,  or  his  essential 
part,  his  life.  Gren.  9 :  4-6,  "  But  flesh,  with  the  neph- 
esh,  soul,  thereof,  which  is  the  blood  thereof,  shall  ye  not 
eat.  And  surely  your  blood  of  your  nephesh^  souls,  will 
I  require  :  at  the  hand  of  every  beast  will  1  require  it, 
and  at  the  hand  of  man  ;  at  the  hand  of  every  man's 
brother  will  I  require  the  nephesh^  soul,  of  man.  Whoso 
sheddeth  man's  blood,  by  man  shall  his  blood  be  shed." 
Readers  of  the  Bible  know  that  the  shedding  of  blood 
signifies  death,  and  murder ;  as  in  1  Kings  2  :  33,  37  ;  2 
Sam.  1:16;  3:27,28;  4:11;  16:8.  The  blood  of 
your  souls,  must  mean  the  murder  of  your  souls.  Surely 
the  beasts  could  not  shed  the  blood  of  an  immaterial, 
immortal  soul  !  This,  then,  speaks  of  the  death  of  the 
poor  "immortal"  soul,  as  the  penalty  is  nephesh  for 
nephesh.  Will  you  send  the  soul  of  the  beast  to  endure 
the  fires  of  eternal  torments,  for  following  the  instincts 
of  his  nature  ?  We  might  ask  if  Moses  knew  that  the 
nephesh  meant  a  ghost,  that  was  not  tangible,  and  had 
no  blood,  why  did  he  not  use  the  terms  chay^  and  chay- 
ah^  or  chayim,  for  the  hfe  of  the  body,  if  he  meant  any 
such  thing  ?  for  he  uses  these  terms  to  express  life,  &c. 
in  hundreds  of  other  places.  Why  use  the  term  nephesh 
to  express  the  body,  or  person,  when  he  could  have  used 
nine  other  words  that  would  have  expressed  a  dead 
body,  besides  the  term  soul,  viz.  :  ish,  pena,  peger,  nehe- 
lar^  geveyah,  heheyah,  shear,  adam,  face,  all  of  which  arc 
translated  a  man,  and  person,  and  are  applied  to  dead 
bodies  ?     See  Jud.  9  :  5,  18  ;    20:  39  ;  2  Kings  10  :  7  ; 


76  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

Gen.  2 :  23  ;  Job  32  :  21 ;  Jer.  33  :  5  ;  31 :  40  ;  41:9; 
Isa.  37 :  36  ;  Deut.  1:17;  21:  23  ;  Jer.  26  :  23 ;  34  :  20  ; 

16  :  4,  18  ;  36:  30  ;  1  Sam.  31  :  12  ;  Neh.  8  :  3;  2  Kings 
8:5;  Prov.  5 :  11  ;  Ezek.  44  :  25  ;  2  Sam.  17:  11.  As, 
then,  there  was  no  want  of  words,  why  do  the  Scriptures 
say  meth  nephesh^  dead  soul,  if  only  the  body  without 
the  soul  was  intended,  and  the  soul  is  an  immaterial 
living  ghost,  apart  from  the  body  ?  For  all  these 
words  mean  a  man,  person,  body,  or  carcase.  Now,  if 
nephesh  ever  meant  an  immortal,  immaterial  soul,  Moses 
would  not  have  apphed  that  term  to  the  material  man  ; 
and  especially  the  phrase,  me^/t  nephesh^  dead  soul,  would 
never  occur. 

We  will  now  present  nine  cases,  where  the  translators, 
apparently  to  hide  the  death  of  the  soul,  have  translated 
a  killed  or  murdered  soul^  a  person.  We  will  here  call 
the  nephesh^  sl  ghost,  to  show  its  absurdity.  Num.  31  : 
19,  ^'  Whosoever  hath  killed  any  ghost,  (rendered  per- 
son,) and  whosoever  hath  touched  any  slain,  purify  your- 
selves." 35  :  11,  "  Then  shall  ye  appoint  your  cities  of 
refuge  for  you,  that  the  slayer  may  flee  thither,  which 
killeth  any  ghost  by  error  ;"  translated,  that  killeth  any 
person  at  unawares.  Ver.  15,  "  That  every  one  that 
killeth  any  ghost  at  unawares,  may  flee  thither."  Ver. 
30,  '^  Whoso  killeth  any  ghost,  the  murderer  shall  be  put 
to  death."  Deut.  27  :  25,  ''  Cursed  be  he  that  taketh  a 
reward  to  slay  an  innocent  ghost. ''^  Josh.  20  :  3,  "  That 
the  slayer  that  killeth  any  ghost  unawares,  may  flee 
thither."  Yer.  9,  reads  the  same.  1  Sam.  22 :  22  ; 
"  I  have  occasioned  the  death  of  all  the  ghosts  of  thy 
father's  house  ;"  and,  Prov.  28  :  17,  "A  man  that  doth 
violence  to  the  blood  of  any  ghost,  shall  flee  to  the  pit ; 
let  no  man  stay  him."  But  if  it  be  absurd  in  any  of 
these  texts,  to  translate  the  word  nephesh,  by  a  word 
that  indicates  a  soul  that  can  live  apart  from  the  body, 
or  a  ghost,  why  does  inspiration  use  the  term  neph- 
esh, in  preference  to  so  many  others,  when  only  the 
person  was  evidently  intended  ?  But  in  those  days  the 
Pagan  fable  of  the  immortal  soul  was  not  in  vogue. 

We  will  now  furnish  you  with  nine  cases,  where  to 
hide  the  death  of  the  soul,  meth  nephesh,  dead  soul,  is 
rendered,  in  every  case,  '^  a  dead  body."  Numb.  9  :  10, 
"If  any  man   of  you,   or  of  your  posterity,  shall  be 


SOULS  SAID  TO  BE  DEAD.  77 

unclean,  by  reason  of  a  meth  nephesh^  a  dead  soul.''  Lev. 
21  :  11,  *'  Neither  shall  ye  go  into  any  meth  nephesh^ 
dead  soul^  Num.  6:6,  "  All  the  days  that  he  sepa- 
rateth  himself  unto  the  Lord,  he  shall  come  at  no  fneth 
nephesh^  dead  souiy  19  :  16,  "  Whosoever  toucheth  one 
that  is  slain  with  the  sword  in  the  open  field,  or  a  meth 
nephesh^  dead  soul^  or  a  hone  of  a  nephesh^  souiy  2  Chron. 
20  :  24,  "  And  behold,  they  were  all  meth  nephesh,  dead 
souls,  fallen  to  the  earth."  Verse  25,  "  They  found 
among  them  in  abundance  both  riches,  with  the  meth 
nephesh^  dead  souls ^  and  precious  jewels."  Ps.  97  :  2, 
"  The  meth  nephesh^  dead  souls ^  of  thy  servants  have 
they  given  to  be  meat  unto  the  fowls  of  the  heaven." 
Ps.  110  :  6,  ''He  shall  judge  among  the  heathen,  he  shall 
fill  the  places  with  the  meth  nephesh,  dead  souls."  Hag. 
2  :  13,  "  If  one  that  is  unclean  by  a  meth  nephesh^  dead 
soul,"  &c.  These  sacred  writers  would  have  been 
turned  out  of  our  modern  popular  churches,  if  they  had 
therein  affirmed  that  the  fancied  "  immortal  souls"  had 
blood  and  bones,  and  died ;  and  absolutely  became  so 
corrupt  and  abominable,  as  to  render  the  person  touch 
ing  them  unfit  for  the  service  of  God  till  purified,  yeaj 
even  after  he  had  washed  his  clothes. 

We  will  now  present  you  four  texts,  where  the  meth 
nephesh^  dead  soul  of  a  man,  is  rendered  a  dead  body  of  a 
man.  Numb.  13  :  1 1,  '*  He  that  toucheth  the  meth  neph- 
esh^  dead  soul,  of  any  man,  shall  be  unclean  seven  days." 
Here  the  margin  skulks  around  the  truth,  and  reads,  the 
"  dead  body  of  any  soul  of  man."  Numb.  9  :  6,  "  And 
there  were  certain  men  who  were  defiled  by  the  meth 
nephesh^  the  dead  soul  of  a  man,  and  they  could  not 
keep  the  passover  on  that  day."  Ver.  7,  "  And  those 
men  said  unto  him,  we  are  defiled  by  the  meth  nephesh^ 
dead  soul  of  a  man."  Num.  19  :  13,  "  Whosoever 
toucheth  the  meth  nephesh^  the  dead  soul^  of  any  man 
that  is  dead."  Observe  the  phraseology  here.  The 
man  may  have  a  dead  soul,  but  that  dead  soul  is  not  an 
abstraction,  it  is  the  man,  himself,  that  is  dead  ;  and  the 
man  has  no  "  immortal"  or  "  never-dying"  soul,  or 
*'  deathless  spirit,"  that  has  escaped  the  death  of  him- 
self How  will  any  dare  attempt  to  reconcile  these 
passages  with  the  current  theology  ?  Your  complaisant 
translators  have  covered  them  up,  to  save  you  the  pains ! 


78  BItiLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

Will  you  say  a  man  has  two  souls — the  one  that  can 
die,  and  the  other  that  is  "  never-dying  ?" 

Here  we  might  rest  our  proofs,  that  a  living  nephesh 
is  a  living  maUy  and  a  dead  nephesh  is  a  dead  man^  or 
a  dead  body  :  but,  we  have  not  yet  done.  We  wish  to 
bury  the  immortal  soul  fable  beneath  such  a  burden  of 
plain  facts,  that  it  will  never  have  a  resurrection.  The 
succeeding  texts  as  plainly  teach  the  death  of  the  soul, 
as  do  the  preceding.  Observe,  where  w^e  write  soul^  the 
Hebrew  w^ord  is  nephesh.  Lev.  24  :  17,  "  He  that 
smiteth  the  soul  of  a  man,  shall  surely  be  put  to  death  ; 
and  he  that  killeth  a  beast  shall  make  it  good,  soul  for 
souV  Deut.  19  :  6,  "  Lest  the  avenger  ....  overtake 
him,  because  the  way  is  long,  and  smite  him  in  soul  ;" 
rendered,  "  slay  him."  Ver.  1 1,  "  But,  if  any  man  hate 
his  neighbor,  and  lie  in  wait  for  him,  and  rise  up  against 
him,  and  smite  him  in  soul  ;"  rendered,  "  smite  him 
mortally  that  he  die."  This  is  evidence  that  the 
translators  knew  that,  to  smite  in  soul  was  to  kill, 
or  murder  the  man.  Compare  2  Kings  25  :  25,  with 
the  margin  of  Jer.  40  :  14,  where  Gedaliah  was 
smitten  in  soul,  so  that  he  died.  Jud.  5  :  18,  '*  Zebulun 
and  ISTaphtah  were  a  people  that  endangered  their  souls 
unto  the  death  in  the  high  places  of  the  field  [of  battle.]" 
Josh.  2  :  14,  "  And  the  men  answered  her,  our  send 
instead  of  you  to  die,"  &c.  2  Sam.  14  :  14,  "  For  we 
must  needs  die,  neither  doth  God  respect  any  soul  from 
death."  Job  31  ;  39,  "  If  I  have  eaten  the  fruits  thereof 
without  money,  or  caused  the  soul  of  the  owners  thereof 
to  expired  Job  36  :  14,  "  Their  nephesh^  soul^  dieth  in 
youth,  and  their  chayah^ life^'m  among  the  unclean."  Num. 
23  :  10,  "  Let  my  soul  die  the  death  of  the  righteous^  and 
let  my  last  end  be  like  his."  This,  Hke  Ps.  97  :  2, 
declares  that  the  souls  of  the  righteous^  die.  Judg.  16  : 
30,  ''  Let  my  soul  die  with  the  PhiHstines."  Acts  5:15, 
"  And  Ananias,  hearing  these  words,  fell  down,  and 
exepsuxe^'^  (his  soul  expired,)  is  rendered,  "  gave  up  the 
ghost."  Rev.  16  :  3,  "  And  every  psuche  zosa  apetha- 
nen^  hving  soul  died  in  the  sea."  Matt.  2  :  20,  "  They 
are  dead  that  sought  the  psiiche^  soul^  of  the  child." 
Matt.  10  :  39,  ''  He  that  findeth  his  psuche^  soul,  shall 
lose  it  ;  and  he  that  loseth  his  psuche,  soul,  for  my  sake, 
shall  find  it."     An  objector  may   say  that   soul,  here, 


SOULS  SAID  TO  BE  DEAD.  79 

meaits  life  ;  'but  we  say  it  means  "  himself''^  and  no  man 
loses  himself  till  he  loses  his  life.     See  also,  Mark  3  :  4 
8  :  35  •  Luke  6;  9;   9:  56;   14:  26;   17:  33  ;  John  12 
25  ;   13  :  37,  38  ;  Acts  15  :  26  ;  27 :  10,  22;  Eool  11:3 
PhiL  2:  30  ;     1  John  3:16;    Eev,  12 :  10.      All  these 
places  plaifily  declare  that  the  psitche^  the  8oul^  can  be 
murdered,  or  lost  in  death  for  Christ's  sake  ;  and  that  it 
lies  down  in  death. 

Here,  then,  are  sixty  places  in  this  catalogue  of  dead 
souls,  where  the  translators  could  not  call  nephesh  and 
psuche  a  :soid^  except  in  a  few  places  in  the  margin  ;  for 
the  manifest  contradiction  in  the  expression,  dead  i??i' 
mortal  soul^  has  compelled  them  to  throw  away  the 
Hebrew  idiom,  and  justly  translate  the  soul^  a  man,  a 
person,  the  body,  they,  him,  me,  fish,  a  beast,  or  life,  in 
;all  these  «ixty  places.  So  that  nephesh  and  psiiche^  even 
in  the  estimation  of  the  learned  that  sustain  the  popular 
theory,  mean  the  creature,  or  person,  himself 

HAVE  THE  TRANSLATORS  OF  THE  COMMON  VERSION  BEEN 
FAITHFUL  ? 

We  fully  admit  that  the  preceding  sixty  texts  are  just- 
ly translated ;  but  the  fraud  consists  in  translating  the 
identical  words,  where  they  would  favor  the  Pagan  no- 
tion of  immortality,  in  such  a  manner  as  to  cover  up  the 
mortality  of  the  soul,  and  favor  the  belief  <bi  its  conscious 
separate  existence.  In  three  hundred  and  ten  places, 
where  this  could  not  be  done,  the  translators  have  called 
the  soul  something  else,  so  as  to  conceal  the  truth.  Had 
they  been  as  honest,  as  they  have  shown  themselves 
terafty,  they  would  have  rendered  nephesh  and  psuche^ 
«oal  every  time,  or  have  given  the  words  untranslated, 
or  in  every  case  where  the  words  occur^  have  given  in 
their  Btea-d -a  uniform  synonym,  or  6uch  other  term  as 
would,  in  every  case,  have  exactly  conveyed  the  idea  of 
the  original  In  Num,  23  :  10,  and  Jud.  16 :  30;  to  con- 
ceal the  death  of  the  soul,  the  translators  have  left  out 
the  word  and  added  ^'  mey  ^  Let  my  soul  die,"  was  the 
prayer  of  the  two,  and  should  have  been  in  the  text. 
Now,  if  they  believed  in  the  separate  conscious  existence 
of  the  soul,  they  must  have  Been  that  these  two  plaees 
lalone^  were  conclusive  proof  that  such  -eoul  must  die, 


80  RIBLE  VS,  TRADITION- 

and  evidently  to  hide  which  they  have  left  out  the  word 
soul  that  would  have  clearly  manifested  the  truth,  and 
inserted  other  words  that  completely  obscure  the  truth 
respecting  the  nature  of  the  soul.  So  in  Genesis,  where- 
the  word  ncphcsh  and  chayiah  nephesh  are  applied  to 
beasts,  and  reptiles,  they  are  studiously  concealed  in  the- 
translation ;  but  when  the  same  terms  apply  to  man,  they 
are  so  translated  as  to  advance  and  eujcourage  the 
"  pious  (?)  fraud''  I 

A  recourse  to  the  laws  of  figurative  language  will  not 
help  our  opponents.  "We  can  admit  that  the  flesh  and 
body  are  used  in  two  hundred  and  six  places  to  repre- 
sent the  whole  creature  or  person  ;  that  is,  the  soul,  as- 
defined  by  Scripture-  But  the  soul  as  constituting  the? 
whole  being  can  never  be  used  to  express  only  a  part. 
That  is,  the  terms,  nephe&h  and  psiiche^  comprehending 
the  whole  man  or  creature  ;  or  even,  as  in  the  estimation 
of  current  theology,  as  constituting  the  most  important 
part  of  man,  what  is  essential  to  his  being  ;  these  terms^. 
w^e  say,  can  never  represent  the  body  only,  in  the  sense 
of  the  body  being  less  than  the  soul.  The  greater  term 
is  never  used  as  a  type  of  the  lesser  term.  Examples  : 
The  eyes  are  appropriately  used  in  one  hundi*ed  and 
ninety  places  to  represent  the  mind,  but  the  mind  is 
never  used  to  represent  the  eyes.  The  hand  two  hun- 
dred times  represents  power,  but  power  never  represents 
the  hand.  The  earth  is  used  one  hundred  and  forty-six 
times  to  represent  the  people  upon  it ;  house  two  hun- 
dred and  seventy-five  times  for  the  family  in  it ;  seven- 
teen times  for  the  church,  but  never  is  this  order  rever- 
sed. In  more  than  eight  hundred  places  the  heart  is 
used  to  represent  the  intelligent  and  moral  creature,  the 
soul ;  but  never  is  the  term  soul  used  to  represent  only 
the  fleshly  organ  of  the  heart.  Now  to  apply  this  argu- 
ment, the  terms  neiyliesh^  and  psuche^  the  only  words 
translated  soul^.  are  used  in  sixty  places  in  such  a  man- 
ner that  our  opponents  are  obhged  to  confess  that  they 
mean  only  the  body,  or  person,  or  creature  \  therefore, 
as  the  greater  is  never  used  to  represent  the  less,  the 
soul,  the  creature,  the  body^  the  person  himself,  equally 
express  the  same  thing.  A  dead  body  is  a  dead  soul  ^ 
and  a  dead  soul  is  a  dead  body.  The  very  term  living 
soul,  or  living  creature,  implies  that  there  may  be  dead 


/7^       Of*'  TH ^ 

HEBREW   IDIOMS.  J|TT  *"^  gf  "^  ^^  "^* 

souls.  We  have  presented  thirteen  places  wReife  tho 
term  soul  not  only  means  the  body,  but  is  the  very  body 
itself,  and  is  so  translated.  Besides  this,  we  have  pre- 
sented five  hundred  and  ninety-seven  other  places  where 
the  terms  nephesh  and  psuche^  does  not  mean,  even  in 
the  estimation  of  our  opponents,  an  abstract  soul,  that 
can  separately  exist,  but  where  the  terms  evidently  mean 
animal  life,  and  the  creature  himself,  both  of  man  and 
beast.  From  the  peculiar  structure  of  the  Hebrew 
idiom,  the  term  soul  is  used  instead  of  the  reflective  pro- 
nouns ;  and  in  such  a  manner,  that  in  two  hundred  places 
an  unfaithful  interpreter — ^biased  by  a  Pagan  theory, 
early  imbibed,  carefully  fostered,  and  sustained  by  popu- 
lar prejudice — can  put  such  a  construction  upon  plain 
language  as  to  assume  that,  because  the  soul  is  separately 
spoken  of,  therefore  the  soul  must  be  a  separate  thing. 
"We  say,  we  have  quoted  six  hundred  and  ten  places, 
where  the  soul  evidently  means  the  man,  or  beast ;  and 
no  other  construction  can  possibly  be  forced  upon  these 
places  ;  therefore  the  inference  is  irresistible,  that  in  the 
other  two  hundred  places,  where  it  is  not  asserted  that 
the  soul  is  a  separate  thing  from  the  man,  although 
separately  mentioned,  it  must  necessarily  mean  in  these 
places  the  same  as  in  the  other  six  hundred  and  ten 
places,  that  the  soul  is  the  man  himself 

We  will  give  an  illustration.  Luke  1  :  46,  "  Mary 
said,  My  soid  doth  magnify  the  Lord^  and  my  spirit  hath 
rejoiced  in  God  my  Saviour.  For  he  hath  regarded  the 
low  estate  of  his  harulmaiden?''  In  this  short  specimen 
of  the  Hebrew  poetic  idiom,  we  have  six  persons,  ox 
things,  separately  spoken  of  as  acting,  or  capable  of  act- 
ing. Mary  said :  the  soul  magnified :  the  spirit  rejoiced , 
and  the  handmaiden /(^/^  regarded.  Besides  we  have  two 
other  persons,  the  Lord,  and  God  my  Saviour.  Yet  the 
two  last  are  comprehended  in  the  singular  pronoun  Ae, 
which  designates  them  as  one,  and  the/o^^r  others,  are 
all  included  in  the  singular  pronoun  me,  in  the  next  line  ; 
and  of  course  mean  but  one  person  :  for  Mary  continued 
to  say,  "  For,  lo,  from  henceforth,  all  generations  shall 
call  ME  blessed."  Now  it  would  be  just  as  logical  to  say, 
that  Mary,  her  soul,  her  spirit,  and  the  handmaiden, 
were  four  separate  persons^  that  could  live  separately, 
distinctly,  and  independently  of  each  other — or  two  per- 


82  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

sons  and  two  ghosts — as  to  say  the  soul,  or  the  spirit 
could  Hve  apart  from  Mary  herself,  or  even  from  her 
body. 

We  give  another  illustration  of  the  Hebrew  idiom. 
Acts  2 :  25,  "  David  speaketh....!  foresaw  the  Lord  al- 
ways before  my  face.... therefore  did  my  heart  rejoice, 
and  my  tongue  was  glad  ;  moreover  also  my  flesh  shall 
rest  in  hope  :  because  thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in 
hades,  neither  wilt  thou  suffer  thine  Holy  One  to  see 
corruption."  The  record  of  David,  speaking  in  the  per- 
son of  another  says  :  1,1  foresaw  ;  2,  my  heart  rejoiced ; 
3,  my  tongue  was  glad  ;  and  4,  xny  flesh  hoped  ;  because 
God  would  not  leave,  5,  my  soul  in  the  state  of  death, 
nor  suffer,  6,  his  Holy  One  to  see  corruption"  :  [But 
would  give  to  Christ  an  early  resurrection.]  Because 
the  attributes  of  mind  are  here  applied  to  different  parts 
of  the  man,  shall  we  say  that  there  are  six  separate,  inde- 
pendent entities  spoken  of  here,  and  rashly  conclude  that 
the  heart,  and  tongue,  and  flesh,  and  soul,  and  Holy  One 
are  not  identical  with  the  "  I"  ?  and  can  live  separately 
from  the  "  I"  ?  especially,  too,  as  the  soul  is  represented 
as  being  in  the  state  of  death,  and  the  Holy  One  liable  to 
corruption,  if  left  in  that  state  ?  But  it  would  be  just  as 
reasonable  to  infer  all  this,  as  to  infer  that  the  soul  or 
spirit,  in  consequence  of  similar  phraseology,  could  live 
separately  from  the  body  or  the  man  !  But  even  could 
our  opponents  clearly  prove  that  the  soul  could  exist  in 
a  conscious  state  separately  from  the  body,  which  the 
Scripture  calls  the  man,  which  is  utterly  impossible,  even 
then,  the  soul  could  not  be  proved  immortal.  For  there 
stand  our  three  hundred  and  fifty  texts  showing  that  the 
soul  can  be  killed  and  destroyed ;  and  we  shall  present 
hundreds  of  others  that  assert  that  the  wicked  will  be 
destroyed. 

We  hope  we  have  made  this  matter  plain.  We  wish 
to  forestall  all  the  evasions  of  the  lovers  of  error.  But 
ah  !  what  becomes  of  the  immortal  soul  theory  ? — 
Scattered  to  the  winds  of  heaven  !  And  as  this  dogma 
carries  with  it,  by  logical  consequence,  fruits  that  dis- 
honor God  and  his  Son,  we  heartily  respond,  Amen. 
Paul  says,  that  He,  "  whom  no  man  hath  seen,  nor  can 
see,"  "the  blessed  and  only  Potentate,  the  Lord  of 
Lords,"  "  ONLY  hath  immortality."  1  Tim.  6  :  16.     But 


CONCLUDING  REMARKS.  83 

Will  ye,  ye  Theologians,  say,  "  All  men  are  immortal  ?" 
Thus  "  Ye  make  void  the  word  of  God  by  your  tra- 
ditions," The  serpent  said,  "  Ye  shall  not  surely  die, 
but  shall  be  as  Gods  ;"  and  so  say  you  !  "  I  have  said, 
ye  are  g-ods,  but  ye  shall  die  like  men."  Ps.  82  :  6.  Do 
you  say,  '^^  You  have  taken  away  our  gods,  and  what 
have  we  more  ?"  We  reply  ;  we  present  you  in  the 
stead  thereof,  the  glorious  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  that 
proclaims  to  the  obedient  immortahty  through  him, 
when  his  kingdom  shall  be  established  throughout  the 
earth,  and  the  entire  destruction  of  the  conscious  being 
of  the  wicked,  a  kingdom  filled  with  universal  holiness 
and  universal  happiness. 

We  have  shown  that  the  soul  faints,  dies,  expires  ;  is 
in  the  hand  of  the  grave  ;  yea,  is  buried  in  the  grave  ; 
we  bring  you  nine  texts,  that  speak  of  numerous  ''  dead 
souls-"  an  army  of  one  hundred  and  eighty-five  thousand 
^'  all  d^ead  souls  ;"  which  clearly  settles  the  Bible  defini- 
nition  of  the  term,  and  the  mortality  of  the  soul.  We 
have  shown  that  the  translators,  complaisant  to  a  semi- 
Popish  king,  have  wrested  the  Scriptures  in  almost  every 
place  where  the  word  soul  occurs,  and  where  the  absur- 
dity was  not  too  glaring  to  escape  detection  by  the  com- 
mon reader;  but  when  the  nephesh  and  psuche  are  said 
to  lie  down  in  death,  to  expire,  to  enter  the  grave,  they 
have  used  the  terms  life,  dead  body — any  thing,  rather 
than  that  the  providers  of  the  loaves  and  fishes,  the 
dear  people  should  know,  that  their  fondly  cherished 
^'  immortal  souls"  would  surely  die,  and  be  buried 
in  the  grave  !  We  have  shown  that  the  term  soul 
is  thirty  times  applied  to  beasts  and  to  every  creeping 
thing,  and  then,  that  the  translators  have  used  the 
term  "  life,"  or  something  else,  for  they  were  not  so  libe- 
ral as  some  are  in  these  latter  days,  to  get  themselves 
out  of  a  dilemma,  to  confer  upon  all  the  animal  crea- 
tures, "  immortal  souls  !"  But  when  the  nephesh  and 
psuche  are  threatened  with  the  second  death,  the  term 
soul  is  introduced,  so  as  to  save  the  endless  torment 
invention  ! 


84 


CHAPTEK  YI. 


WHAT  IS  THE  SPIRIT  OF  MAN  ? 

The  Hebrew  word  ruali^  agrees  with  the  Greek  word 
pneuma^  and  these  are  the  only  words  that  are  properly 
translated  spirit.  The  derivations  and  definitions  of 
both  words  are  nearly  the  same.  Rvah  is  derived  from 
ruah^  "  to  blow,"  and  nesme^  "  to  breathe :"  primarily 
signifies  wind^  air^  breath  ;  but  it  is  sometimes  used  to 
signify  a  principle,  having  some  relation  to  electricity, 
diffused  through  the  atmosphere,  and  perhaps  through 
universal  space,  which  is  the  principle  that  stimulates 
the  organs  of  men  and  plants  into  activity,  and  which  is 
used  by  the  animals  themselves  to  control  their  volun- 
tary motions.  Thus,  when  an  animal  wishes  to  use  a 
member,  a  current  of  electricity  is  transmitted  by  the 
will,  through  the  nerves,  to  the  blood  in  the  member, 
and  produces  those  contractions  and  dilations  of  the 
muscles  of  the  member,  which  are  necessary  to  move  it 
in  the  required  direction.  This  principle,  being  the 
principle  of  life  in  all  creatures,  is  in  the  hands  of  God, 
and  controlled  by  him  ;  hence,  ''  In  him  we  live,  and 
move,  and  have  our  being  ;"  and  "  God  is  the  God  of 
the  spirits  of  all  flesh."  When  God  taketh  away  his 
spirit,  and  his  breath, — that  is,  God's  spirit,  and  God's 
breath, — then  ^'  man  returneth  to  his  earth,  and  his 
thoughts  perish  :"  Ps.  146  :  4.  Wherefore  this  spirit, 
in  Scripture,  is  called  neshemoth^  the  breath  of  God,  as 
well  as  the  breath  of  man. 

The  Greek  word  pneuma^  derived  from  pneo^  ".to 
blow,"  has  been  chosen  by  inspiration  to  represent  the 
Hebrew  word  ruah.     It  means  wind,  air,  breath,  and  a 


WHAT  IS  THE  SPIRIT  ?  85 

something,  or  principle  contained  in  them,  which  imparts 
and  sustains  life. 

The  spirit  being  the  universal  principle  of  hfe,  its 
secondary,  metaphorical,  and  poetical  meanings,  will  be 
as  various  as  the  various  effects  of  life  ;  and  it  will  re- 
quire great  care  to  enable  us  to  ascertain  the  specific 
meaning  which  the  word  bears  in  particular  cases. 

Some  beings  seem  to  live  by  the  pure  ruah^  or  spirit, 
without  the  intervention  of  the  atmosphere  ; — such  are 
called  spiritual  beings.  Such  are  angels,  and  the  incor- 
ruptible nature  manifested  by  Jesus  Christ,  after  he  was 
risen  from  the  tomb,  for  he  ascended  above  the  atmo- 
sphere ;  and  this  nature  is  the  pattern  of  that  which 
Christians  are  to  aspire  after,  "  to  seek  for  ;"  and  God, 
in  conferring  such  a  nature,  necessarily  confers  eternal 
life  :  see  Eom.  2  :  7.  But  the  resurrected  Saviour,  and 
the  angels,  are  tangible  beings.  Demons  are  called 
spirits ;  by  which  we  understand  spiritual  beings,  beings 
that  live  by  means  of  the  pure  or  unadulterated  spirit, 
or  principle  of  all  life.  We  have  also,  the  *'  to  Hagion 
Fneuma^^^  the  Holy,  or  Consecrated  Spirit,  and  the 
seven  Spirits  of  Grod.  And  spirit  is  sometimes  thought 
to  refer  to  God  himself.  John  4  :  24,  "  Fneuma  ho 
Theos  /"  "  The  God  [isj  Spirit."  But  in  the  preceding 
verse,  spirit  is  used  as  opposed  to  outward  worship  ; 
and  it  appears  to  be  used  in  the  same  sense  in  this  verse. 

We  might  therefore  understand  these  verses  thus  : — 
The  true  worshippers  shall  worship  the  Father,  not  with 
outward  observances,  in  particular  places,  as  at  Jerusa- 
lem, in  preference  to  Mount  Gerizim  ;  but  with  their 
minds  and  hearts  :  for  God  is  an  intelligent  Being,  and 
they  that  worship  him,  must  worship  him  with  intelli- 
gence and  sincerity.  In  Ps.  139  :  7,  "  Whither  shall  I 
fiy  from  thy  spirit  ?"  It  is  in  heaven,  it  is  in  sheol^  (the 
grave,)  and  it  is  in  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  sea.  It 
pervades  all  things,  is  the  second  cause  of  all  motion, 
whether  in  the  planets,  the  tides,  the  lightnings  of  hea- 
ven, or  in  the  breathing  creatures  that  God  has  made. 
It  may  have  been  this  ruah  Elohim^  spirit  of  the  Elehim, 
that  "  brooded  upon  the  face  of  the  waters;"  Gen.  1  :  2. 
It  is  not  necessarily  implied  here  that  the  ruah  was  a 
personal  being ;  but  that  God's  intelligence,  or  this 
spirit,  was  every  where      Therefore,  we  infer,  that  the 


86  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

nature  of  God  is  not  clearly  determined  by  any  of  these 
expressions. 

This  principle  of  life,  or  spirit,  is  not  the  air,  nor  the 
breath, — ^but  is  contained  in  the  air,  and  breath.  The 
breath  *n-spired,  and  the  breath  eic-pired,  possess  differ- 
ent properties ;  the  ^a;-pired  breath  being  deprived  of  its 
spirit  J  which  has  been  transfused  into  the  blood  in  the 
lungs,  for  the  exigences  of  life,  and  is  used  up^  and 
requires  to  be  constantly  replenished.  Life,  then,  is  not 
an  abstract  principle,  but  is  an  effect  of  this  spirit, 
operating  alike  upon  all  organized  beings.  We  say, 
therefore,  strictly  speaking,  that  this  spirit  is  not  the  air, 
but  is  contained  in  the  air.  Angels  may  live  by  pure 
spirit ;  men  cannot.  Man  has  no  abstract  essence 
within  him,  which  gives  to  him  any  pre-eminence  over 
the  living  souls  of  other  animals.  They  all  live,  yea,  the 
souls  of  all  live  in  common,  by  breathing  the  b^-eath  of 
LIVES  ;  because  this  breath  contains  the  spirit,  the  sus- 
taining principle  of  all  lives.  Man's  superiority  is 
derived  from  his  superior  organization.  The  neshemet 
chayim^  the  breath  of  lives,  that  animates  alike  all 
animals,  is  the  spirit  diluted  with  air.  God  caused  man 
to  breathe,  the  neshemet  chayim^  breath  of  lives^  not  the 
pure  ruah.  Gen.  6:  17,  '^  I  bring  a  flood  of  waters 
upon  the  earth,  to  destroy  all  flesh  wherein  is  the  {^uah 
chayim^  spirit  of  hves,  from  under  heaven  ;  and  all  that 
is  in  the  earth  {yigo)  shall  expire ;"  shall  breathe  out  the 
SPIRIT  OF  LIVES.  Gcn.  1  \  15,  "  And  there  went  in  unto 
Noah,  into  the  ark,  two  and  two  of  all  the  flesh  wherein 
is  the  {ruah  chayim)  spirit  of  lives^  Ver.  21,  "  And 
all  flesh  {yigwa)  expired^  that  moved  upon  the  earth, 
both  of  fowl  and  of  cattle,  and  of  beasts,  and  of  every  creep- 
ing thing  that  creepeth  upon  the  earth,  and  every  man : 
ALL  in  whose  nostrils  was  the  {neshmeth  ruah  chayim,) 
breath  of  the  spirit  of  lives,  of  all  that  was  in^the  dry 
land,  (methu,)  died.  And  every  living  substance  was 
destroyed.''  Thus  we  see  that  all  animals, in  common  with 
man,  live  by  breathing  the  same  spirit.  You  will  per- 
ceive that  Moses  uses  the  term  all  flesh,  for  every  living 
creature,  man  included.  Notwithstanding  all  creatures 
possessed,  while  living,  the  spirit  of  lives,  they  had  no 
spirit  that  could  live,  after  they  had  breathed  out  this 
spirit ;  which  spirit,  though  the  cause  of  life,  is  not  a 


WHAT  IS  THE  SPIRIT  ?  87 

living  thing.  Every  living  thing  died,  and  the  spirit 
was  expired,  breathed  out  into  the  universal  pabulum  ol 
all  lives,  which  is  in  the  hands  of  God.  If  the  spirit 
was  a  "  LIVING  THING,"  it  died  also,  for  every  living  thing 
died,  and  every  living  substance  was  destroyed.  Isa. 
31:3,  "Now  the  Egyptians  are  men,  and  not  God; 
and  their  horses  flesh,  and  not  spirit."  It  is  no 
where  intimated  that  any  part  of  man  or  beast  is 
a  gltost.  The  Saxon  word,  ghost^  is  from  gust  of 
wind.  Its  parallel  is  not  found  in  the  original  Scriptures, 
and  it  ought  not  to  be  found  in  the  translation.  The 
spirit  of  man,  then,  is  not  a  living  entity ;  and  although 
no  creature  can  live  without  it,  it  is  not  alive  itself  It 
is  not  organized  for  the  development  of  life,  and  there- 
fore is  not  mortal  nor  immortal,  and  the  expression, 
"  deathless  spirit,"  as  appHed  to  man,  is  a  compound  of 
Paganism,  tradition  and  nonsense. 

But  spirit  has  numerous  secondary  meanings,  such  as 
inteUigence,  courage,  the  mind,  the  temper,  the  disposi- 
tion, &c. ;  and  we  have  the  spirit  of  fear,  of  love,  of 
bondage  ;  and  sixty  other  spirits. 

THE  SPIRIT  MEANS  THE  WIND  AND  AIR. 

The  primary  meaning  of  spirit  is  wind,  or  air.  Exo- 
15  :  10,  "  Thou  didst  blow  with  thy  ruah,  wind,  the  sea 
covered  them."  Ps.  147  :  18,  "  He  causeth  his  ruah  to 
blow,  and  the  waters  flow."  Job  41  :  16,  "  One  is  so 
near  to  another,  that  no  ruah,  air,  can  pass  between 
them."  Pro.  11  :  29,  "  He  that  troubleth  his  own  house 
shall  inherit  the  ruah,  wind^  Pro.  25  :  23,  "  The  north 
ruah,vj\iidi,  driveth  away  rain."  Isa.  41  :  16,  "  The  ricah 
shall  carry  them  away,  and  the  whirl-rwaA  shall  scatter 
them."  Verse  29,  "  Their  molten  images  are  ruah  and 
confusion."  Gen.  3:8,  *^  And  they  heard  the  voice  of 
Jehovah  Elohim  walking  in  the  garden  in  the  ruuh 
(breeze)  of  the  day."  See  also,  Prov.  30  :  4  ;  Ecc.  1:6; 
5  :  16  ;  Jer.  5  :  13  ;  Hos.  12  :  1 ;  Exo.  14 :  21  ;  Isa.  7:2; 
Jer.  14:6;  Jonah  1:4;  and  many  others.  How  absurd 
would  it  be  to  call  the  ruah  a  ghost  in  any  of  these  places. 
Ruah  is  translated  wind  in  hundreds  of  texts.  So  of  the 
corresponding  word  pneuma.  John  3  :  8,  "  The  (pneu- 
ma,)  wind  bloweth  w^here  itlisteth."     The  learned  doubt 


88  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

the  correctness  of  the  common  translation  of  Heb.  1 :  7, 
and  Ps.  104  :  4,  "  Who  maketh  ihQ  pneu7nata^  winds,  his 
messengers,  and  the  flames  of  fire  his  ministers." 

SPIRIT  MEANS  BREATH. 

Job  37:  10,  "By  the  ruah^  breathy  of  God  frost  is 
given."  Ps.  33  :  6,  "  By  the  word  of  the  Lord  were  the 
(shomayim,)  atmospheres  made,  and  all  the  hosts  of 
them  by  the  ruah^  breathy  of  his  mouth."  Isa.  11:4, 
"With  the  ruah^  breathy  of  his  Hps  shall  he  slay  the  wrick- 
ed." Jas.  2  :  26,  "  For  as  the  body  without  the  pneuma^ 
breathy  is  dead ;  so  faith  without  works  is  dead  also." 
Here  the  text  reads  spirit^  the  margin,  breath.  The  ar- 
gument of  James  is,  that  it  requires  spirit  or  breath,  with 
the  body^  to  constitute  a  living  being.  And  his  argu- 
ment would  be  fallacious  if  the  spirit  could  live  without 
the  body  ;  for  then  works  without  faith  would  be  living  II 
Eev.  11  :  11,  "  After  three  days  and  a  half,  the  pneuma 
zoes^  breath  of  life,  or  spirit  of  life,  from  God  entered 
into  them,  and  they  stood  upon  their  feet."  Eev.  13  : 
15,  "  And  he  had  power  to  give  pneuma^  breath^ov 
spirit^  (which  w^ould  give  hfe,)  unto  the  image  of  the 
beast."  Now,  by  what  Bible  authority  is  it  said  that 
ruah  and  pneuma  ever  mean  a  gJiost  ?  But  more  yet. 
Job  26  :  4,  "  To  whom  hast  thou  uttered  words,  and 
whose  ruah^  breathy  came  from  thee  ?"  Ecc.  3  :  19,  "Yea, 
they  (both  man  and  beast,)  have  all  one  ruah^  spirit^  or 
breath."  Verse  21,  "  Who  know^eth  (any  difference  be 
tw^een)  the  ruah^  breathy  or  spirit  of  man,  that  is  breath 
ed  upward ;  and  the  ruah^  breathy  or  spirit  of  a  beast^ 
that  is  breathed  downwards  to  the  earth  ?"  Perhaps 
Solomon  meant,  who  can  explain  the  manner  in  which 
the  ruah  acts  upon  the  organization  so  as  to  produce 
life. 

No  upright  and  intelhgent  writer  contradicts  himself; 
and  yet  some  have  supposed  that  Solomon  does  so  in 
Ecc.  12:  5,  7,  ^  Man  goeth  to  his  long  home,  and  the 
mourners  go  about  the  streets.... Then  shall  the  dust  re- 
turn to  the  earth  as  it  was,  and  the  ruah^  breath^or  spirit^ 
shall  return  to  God  who  gave  it;"  (as  it  was  before  it 
was  given).  What  was  the  ruah  when  God  gave  it  ? 
Not  a  living  entity,  but  the  breath,  or  spirit,  by  which 


SPIRIT   MEANS   BREATit  89 

the  man  lived ;  which  Solomon  says,  is  the  same  in  man 
and  beast.  The  man  made  of  dust  Vy.^-turns  to  dust,  and 
this  principle  of  life  returns,  goes  back  again  into  the 
universal  pabulum  of  all  animal  life — into  the  hands  of 
God.  Job  12  :  9,  "  The  hand  of  the  Lord  hath  wrought 
this.  In  whose  hand  is  the  nepliesh^  soul^  of  every  living 
thing,  and  riiah^  spirit^  or  breathy  of  all  mankind."  There 
is  a  parallel  expression  to  Ecc.  12:  7,  in  Ps.  104:  29, 
*'  Thou  takest  away  their  ruah^  spirit,  or  breath,  they 
die,  and  {they)  return  to  their  dust."  And  again  in  Ps. 
146  :  4,  "  His  ruahj  spirit^  or  breathy  goeth  forth,  (to  God 
of  course,)  he  returneth  to  his  earth  ;  in  that  very  day 
his  thoughts  perish.'''*  Job  34  :  14,  "If  God  set  his  heart 
upon  man,  if  he  gather  unto  himself  his  ruah  and  his 
nesme^  breath  ;  all  flesh  shall  perish  together,  and  man 
shall  turn  again  unto  dust."  Ps.  104  :  29,  "  Thou  hidest 
thy  face,  they  are  troubled  :  thou  takest  away  their 
ruah^  THEY  die,  and  return  to  their  dust.  Thou  sendest 
forth  thy  ruah^  they  are  created,  ("  born  again"  from 
the  dust :)  and  thou  renewest  the  face  of  the  earth." 

Ecc.  12  :  7,  says,  the  ruah  goes  to  God  who  gave  it. 
Now  if  God  intends  to  restore  this  ruah  to  the  man,  so 
that  he  may  live  again^  where  does  God  bring  this  ruah 
from  ?  We  shall  see  that  it  is  not  the  same  ruah,  but 
ruah  of  the  same  kind ;  though  perhaps  less  diluted 
with  atmospheric  air.  We  will  let  Ezekiel  answer :  37  : 
5,  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God  unto  these  bones  :  Behold 
I  will  cause  ruah  to  enter  into  you,  and  ye  shall  live. 
And  I  will  lay  sinews  upon  you,  and  will  bring  up  flesh 
upon  you,  and  cover  you  with  skin,  and  put  ruah  in  you, 
and  ye  shall  live ;  and  ye  shall  know  that  I  am  the  Lord." 
....Verse  8,  "  Lo,  the  sinews  and  the  flesh  came  up  upon 
them,  and  the  skin  covered  them  above  :  but  there  was 
no  ruah  in  them.  Then  said  he  unto  me.  Prophesy  unto 
the  ruah^  ivind ;  prophesy.  Son  of  Man,  and  say  to  the 
ruah^  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God  :  Come  from  (where  ? 
from  heaven  ?  Nay,  but  from)  the/owr  ruah^  tvinds,  Oh 
ruah^  and  breathe  upon  these  slain  that  they  may  live. 
So  I  prophesied  as  he  commanded  me,  and  the  ruah 
came  into  them,  and  they  lived,  and  stood  up  upon  their 
feet,  an  exceeding  great  army."  Thus  we  see  that  the 
ruah  in  Ecc.  12  :  7,  went  to  the  four  winds^  and  at  the 
resurrection,  comes  again  from  the  four  winds :  whif»h 


^  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

winds  "  God  holds  in  his  fists,"  so  that  when  the  ritah 
goes  to  the  four  winds,  the  ruah  goes  to  God,  and  when 
the  ruah  comes  from  the  four  winds,  the  ruah  comes 
from  God.  Verse  13,  "  Ye  shall  know  that  I  am  the 
Lord,  when  I  have  opened  your  graves,  O  my  people, 
and  brought  you  up  out  of  your  graves,  and  shall  put  my 
ruah  in  you  and  ye  shall  live,  and  I  shall  place  you  in 
your  own  land."  Thus  we  see  that  it  is  God's  ruah^  one 
universal  principle  pervading  the  atmosphere,  and  not 
many  distinct  ruah^  as  theologians  teach,  and  is  not  a 
living  thing,  though  the  cause  of  life;  but  which  our 
honest  translators  have  translated  wind,  breath,  spirit, 
and  spirit  of  God,  so  as  best  to  favor  the  Pagan  fable  of 
the  separate  conscious  existence  of  a  spirit  belonging  to 
man  !  !  We  believe  this  to  be  a  prophecy  of  a  literal 
resurrection ;  but  suppose  it  is  only  a  similitude  of  the 
resurrection.  The  man  is  here  put  together  piece  by 
piece,  and  a  remarkable  prominence  is  given  to  the 
breath,  as  containing  the  living  principle.  After  the  man 
was  completely  formed  again,  he  was  but  a  dead  soul, 
for  "  there  was  no  ruah^  breath  in  him."  Now  here  was 
the  place  to  mention  the  separately  existing,  living  ghost 
or  spirit,  if  there  had  been  such  a  thing ;  but  as  God 
knew  of  no  such  living  thing,  he  plainly  intimates  that  all 
that  was  necessary  to  restore  these  dead  souls  to  living 
souls,  or  these  dead  men  to  living  men,  was  breath /rom 
the  FOUR  WINDS.  Yea,  as  in  Gen.  2 :  7,  God  will  blow 
into  their  nostrils  again  the  breath  of  lives,  and  again 
they  will  become  hving  souls. 

THE  SPIRIT  AND  THE  BREATH  ARE  OFTEN  IDENTICAL- 

Job  27  :  1.  Job*s  friends  had  asserted  that  the  severe 
chastisements  of  Job,  and  of  men  in  general,  were  the 
just  retributions  he  and  they  received  for  some  great, 
though,  perhaps,  secret  crimes  in  this  world.  Job  bold- 
ly and  perhaps  impiously,  asserts  upon  his  solemn  oath, 
that  in  his  case,  the  rule  had  been  completely  reversed. 
He  commences  in  the  manner  of  Hebrew  poetry  with 
three  parallelisms,  in  which  the  second  line  of  each  is  but 
the  repetition  or  echo  of  the  first.  "  And  Job  continued 
to  carry  on  his  parable,  and  said  : — 


1 


SPIRIT  AND  BREATH  OFTEN  IDENTICAL.  91 

As  El  liveth,  he  turneth  aside  my  right ! 
1.  I  And  Shaddai  hath  made  me  to  be  at  variance 
with  it ! 
For  so  long  as  my  breath  is  in  me, 
And  the  spirit  of  Eloah  is  in  my  nostrils. 
o    ^  My  Ups  shall  not  speak  what  is  wrong, 

'  \  Nor  shall  my  tongue  utter  deceit." 
In  the  first  line  of  the  second  parallelism,  the  word  for 
breath,  is  nesme^  in  the  second  line  it  is  ruah.  In  many 
places  this  nesme  which  is  said  to  be  the  breath  of  man, 
is  hkewise  said  to  be  the  breath  of  God.  Therefore  we 
conclude  that  nesme  and  ruah  both  refer  to  the  same 
identical  thing ;  the  nesme  contains  the  ruah^  and  both 
are  the  spirit  or  breath  of  God,  and  both  are  in  the  nos- 
trils of  man. 

That  the  nesme,  breath,  and  the  ruah,  spirit,  are  analo- 
gous, we  shall  further  make  evident.  Ps.  1 35  :  17, 
"  Neither  is  there  any  ruah  in  their  mouth?'^  The 
translators  have  perverted  the  meaning  of  ruah  in  many 
places.  Micah  2  :  11,  "  If  a  man  walk  with  the  ruah, 
wind,  and  lie  falsely  ;"  rendered,  "  If  a  man  walking  in 
the  spirit  and  falsehood,  do  lie."  Zech.  6:  5,  ^'  These 
are  the  four  ruah  of  the  heavens  ;"  rendered,  "  spirits  of 
the  heavens  ;"  margin,  winds.  Eccles.  8:8,  *'  There  is 
no  man  that  hath  power  over  the  ruah,  to  retain  the 
ruah  ;"  translated  spirit ;  but  it  evidently  means  breath. 
Ruah  is  translated  breath  in  Gen.  6:17,  *"Two  and  two 
of  all  flesh,  wherein  is  the  ruah  of  chayim.^''  This  is 
translated,  "  breath  of  life."  But  why  have  the  trans- 
lators suppressed  the  plural,  lives  ?  Was  it  lest  the 
common  reader  should  perceive  that  the  spirit  was  the 
one  universal  principle  of  all  lives,  and  not  a  number  of 
individual  beings,  one  of  which  was  confined  in  each 
creature  ?  So,  v.  22,  "  All  in  whose  nostrils  was  the 
nesme  of  the  ruah  of  chayim?''  Thus  the  breath  that 
contains  the  spirit  by  which  all  creatures  live,  is  a  com- 
mon principle,  inhaled  and  exhaled  by  the  nose  ;  hence 
said  to  be  in  the  "  nostrils."  In  Ezek.  1 :  20,  21  ;  10  : 
17 ;  Rev.  11  :  11,  and  13 :  15,  the  ruah  and  pneuina  are 
made  to  represent  the  principle  of  hfe.  "  And  the 
wheels  were  hfted  up,"  [from  the  earth.]  But  how  ? 
seeing  wheels  have  no  life  ?  "  For  the  ruah  of  the 
living  creature  was  in  the  wheels,  [and  lifted  them  up  ;] 


92  BIBLE  VS,  TRADITION. 

margin  reads  *'  spirit  of  life."  "  He  had  po\\er  to  give 
pneuma  unto  the  image  of  the  beast."  "  Spirit  of  life, 
pneuma  zoes,  from  God  entered  into  them."  Isa.  42  : 
5,  "  He  that  giveth  nesme,  breathy  unto  the  people  upon 
it,  and  7"uahj  spirit^  to  them  that  walk  therein."  Here 
the  nesme^  and  the  ruah^  are  made  analogous  by  the 
parallelism.  In  Job.  34  :  14,  if  God  takes  from  man  and 
beast  GocPs  ruah  and  7iesme^  the  same  breath  of  the 
spirit  of  lives  God  breathed  into  them — then,  all  flesh 
perish.  So  in  Ps.  104  :  if  God  take  away  his  ruah  from 
man  and  beast,  they  die ;  if  he  sends  forth  his  ruahy 
they  are  created. 

These  passages  all  prove  that  the  nesme  contains  the 
ruah,  and  the  ruah  is  the  essential  ingredient  in  the 
nesme  ;  and  that  the  spirit,  or  principle  of  life,  is  in  the 
breath  ;  hence  said  to  be  in  the  nostrils  of  man.  Now, 
we  ask  the  candid,  does  the  ruah,  and  pneuma,  when 
related  to  life,  ever  mean  a  ghost  ?  or  any  thing  else 
than  the  breath  of  lives  ?  Were  the  translators  justified 
in  inserting  the  word  ghost  in  any  place  ?  or  in  so  trans- 
lating the  word  spirit,  a5  to  countenance  the  Pagan 
fable  of  its  separate  conscious  existencs  ? 

GHOSTS    OF    MEN    NOT    MENTIONED    IN   THE    ORIGINAL 
SCRIPTURES. 

The  word  ghost  is  a  Saxon  word,  derived  from  gust  of 
wind,  and  occurs  fourteen  times  in  the  King's  version. 
If,  in  A.D.  161 1,  it  meant  merely  the  giving  up  the  wind, 
or  breath  of  lives,  its  introduction  was  then  harmless  ; 
but  now  it  is  used  to  support  the  tremendous  and  con- 
tradictory dogma,  that  while  the  man  is  dead,  his  ghost 
is  consciously  suffering  in  a  hell  of  fire  or  torment,  prior 
to  the  final  judgment ;  or  is  enjoying  ineffable  delights, 
in  a  place  called  "  paradise,"  or  "  heaven,"  or  the  "  spirit 
world,"  or  "  beyond  the  bounds  of  time  and  space." 
Let  us  examine  these  passages.  Gen.  25  :  7,  "  And 
these  are  the  days  of  the  years  of  Abraham's  life  which  he 
livedj  one  hundred  and  seventy-five  years.  And  Abra- 
ham [gave  up  the  ghost,']  and  [died]  in  a  good  old  age, 
an  old  man,  and  full  of  years,  and  was  gathered  to  his 
people.  And  his  sons,  Isaac  and  Ishmael,  buried  him  in 
the  cave  of  Machpelah,"  (v.  8,)  literally,  And  Abraham 


GHOST   NOT    IN    THE   ORIGINAL.  93> 

he  (govaj)  wasted  away^  he  [muth^)  died.  Greenfield 
translates  gova^  expired ;  that  is,  breathed  out  his  breath; 
but  this  is  evidently  a  paraphrase.  Professor  Pick  gives 
the  meaning,  "  wasted  awayP  In  Gen.  6  :  17,  gova  is 
referred  to  every  creature,  and  translated  ''  shall  die  /" 
and,  7  :  21,  '^  all  flesh  {gova^^)  died  ;  all  flesh  wasted  away. 
Gen.  25:  18,  "  And  these  are  the  years  of  the  hfe  of 
Ishmael,  one  hundred  and  thirty-seven  years,  and  he 
[gave  up  the  ghost,]  and  died,  and  was  gathered  to  his 
fathers."  The  words  here  are  the  same  as  in  verse  8, 
"  He  (gova,)  wasted  away;  and  he  {muth,)  diedy  By 
what  authority  did  the  translators  render  gova^  when 
apphed  to  beasts,  "  shall  die,"  and  "  died  ;"  and  when 
the  same  word  apphed  to  Abraham  and  Ishmael,  trans- 
late it  "  gave  up  the  ghost  ?"  But  the  original  is  very 
emphatic,  repeating  the  personal  pronoun,  he  ;  it  is  said 
of  Abraham,  that  he  wasted  away,  he  died,  and  he  was 
gathered  to  his  fathers,  (who  were  idolators  lying  in  the 
grave,)  and  they  buried  him  in  the  cave  of  Machpelah. 
The  very  same  is  said  of  Ishmael,  excepting  that  his 
burial  is  expressed  only  by  the  phrase,  "  he  was  gathered 
to  his  fathers  :"  and  the  context  assures  us,  of  both,  that 
their  living  existence  terminated  in  a  given  portion  of 
time.  Let  the  reader  ponder  this  case,  as  we  shall 
have  to  refer  to  it  again. 

In  Gen.  35  :  28,  the  same  forms  of  expression  recur, 
in  relation  to  Isaac,  and  gova,  which  means  wasted  away, 
is  translated,  "  gave  up  the  ghost."  The  death  of  Jacob 
is  recorded  in  Gen.  49  :  29-33,  where  gova  is  again  trans- 
lated, "  yielded  up  the  ghost."  Gova  is  thus  shame- 
fully translated  in  Lam.  1  :  19,  and  four  times  in  Job. 
We  shall  give  the  passages  in  Job,  from  Fry's  transla- 
tion, who  beheved  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  but 
he  does  not  attempt  to  deduce  the  separate  existence  of  it 
from  these  passages,  which  the  reader  can  compare  with 
the  HONEST  rendering  of  the  King's  translators. 

Job  3.11,  "  Why  might  I  not  have  died  at  the  birth  ? 

Have  come  forth  from  the  womb  and  [gova^  expired  7 

13.  For  now  had  I  been  lying  down  and  been  at  ease, 
I  had  been  aslee'p  ;  rest  had  long  since  been  mine  5 

14.  Among  kings  and  leaders  of  the  earth, 
Who  had  erected  for  themselves  sepulchres .' 


94  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

10  :  18,  '*  Why  then  didst  thou  bring  me  forth  from  the  womb? 
I  might  have  [gova,]  expired,  and  no  eye  have  seen  me. 

19.  I  should  have  been  as  though  /  had  not  existed  7 
Have  been  carried  from  the  womb  to  the  (sheol^)  grave, 

20.  Are  not  my  days  few  and  failing  ? 
Spare  me,  that  I  may  refresh  me  a  little ; 

21.  Before  I  depart  to  return  no  more : 

To  the  land  of  obscurity,  and  of  the  deadly  shade  ; 
To  the  land  covered  from  the  light,  as  of  total  darkness ; 
The  deadly  shade,  where  are  no  vicissitudes  ; 
But  the  noon-tide  is  as  total  darkness  !" 

The  word  translated  land  might  be  translated  earthy 
or  ground.  Job  here  clearly  represents  the  state  of  man 
after  death,  as  a  complete  blank,  a  state  of  utter  uncon- 
sciousness : 

13  :  19,  "  Who  is  he  that  contendeth  with  me  ? 

For  now  if  I  be  still,  I  shall  [gova^\  not  breathe.^'' 

In  14 :  5,  Job  avers,  that  man  has  but  a  frail  existence 
at  best,  and  must  soon  die,  without  the  interference  of 
the  Almighty. 

6.  **  Let  him  alone,  and  he  will/ai/, 

He  will  soon  fill  up  as  a  hireling  his  day. 

7.  For  there  is  hope  of  a  tree, 
When  it  hath  been  cut  down, 
That  it  may  bud  forth  afresh 
And  its  suckers  not  fail. 

8.  Though  its  root  be  grown  old  in  the  soil, 
And  its  trunk  be  dead  in  the  dust, 

9.  By  the  inhaling  of  water  it  may  germinate, 
And  form  its  boughs  like  a  fresh-set  plant. 

10.  But  the  strong  man  dieth,  and  lieth  prostrate  j 
But  man  [gova^'\  expireth — and  where  is  he? 

11.  As  the  billows  pass  away  with  the  tides, 
And  the  flood  is  exhausted  and  dried  up  ; 

So  man  lieth  down,  and  will  rise  up  no  more. 

12.  Till  the  heavens  be  dissolved  they  will  not  awake, 
Nor  yet  be  aroused  from  their  sleep  ! 

13.  Oh  that  thou  wouldst  hide  me  in  (sheol)  the  grave ! 
That  thou  wouldst  conceal  me  till  thy  wrath  be  passed. 

14.  That  thou  wouldst  hasten  the  set  time,  and  remember  me, 
When  there  shall  die  a  man  that  shall  live  again; 

All  my  set  time  will  I  patiently  wait, 
Till  the  period  of  my  reviving  shall  come. 


GHOST   NOT   IN   THE   ORIGINAL.  ^  95 

15.  Thou  wilt  call,  and  T  shall  answer, 

Thou  wilt  seek  with  desire  the  work  of  thy  hands. 
19.  The  waters  wear  away  the  stones, 

The  dust  of  the  earth  inundates  her  produce, 

And  the,hopeof  mortal  man  thou  consumest. 
21.  His  sons  may  come  to  honor,  but  he  will  not  know  it^ 

And  they  may  be  reduced,  but  he  will  not  discern  them.^^ 

Will  the  reader  refer  to  the  common  version.  In  the 
four  places  where  the  common  version  have  inserted 
"  gave  up  the  gost,"  the  original  is  gova^  which  here  is 
three  times  translated  ^'- expired, ^'^  and  once  "not  breathe"; 
but  the  sense  of  *'  wasting  away,"  would  be  appUcable 
in  every  case.  Fry  is  continually  commenting  upon  the 
obvious  fact  that  Job  had  no  idea  of  the  immortality  of 
the  soul,  but  Fry's  notes  are  full  of  it ;  affirming  that  it 
is  only  clearly  revealed  in  the  gospel.  Nevertheless  the 
gospel,  containing  the  promise  of  immortality,  was  preach- 
ed to  Abraham  ;  and  he,  like  Job,  was  taught  that  he 
should  become  the  future  possessor  of  an  everlasting  in- 
heritance, by  a  resurrection  to  be  obtained  through  the 
"  MAN  that  should  die  and  live  again ^  Job  speaks  so 
plainly  of  the  unconsciousness  of  the  dead,  that  the  trans- 
lators in  revenge,  it  would  seem,  have  made  him  teach 
five  times  the  separate  existence  of  the  ghost  !  1 

11 :  20.     "  But  the  eyes  of  the  wicked  shall  fail, 
And  refuge  shall  perish  from  them, 
Ay,  their  hope  shall  be  an  expiring  hreathr 

Common  version,  the  "  giving  up  of  the  ghost ;"  the 
margin  and  Parkhurst  translate,  a  puff  of  breath  ;  Good, 
a  scattered  breath.  The  original  is  here,  nophakhneph 
eshy  which  Prof  Pick  says,  means  "  breathed  out  tht 
breathy  We  suppose  it  means,  Their  hope  shall  be  as 
a  soul  or  being  that  has  ceased  to  breathe — a  nonentity. 

Jer.  15  :  9,  "  She  that  hath  borne  seven,  languisheth  . 
she  hath  [given  up  the  ghost]  ;  her  sun  has  gone  down 
while  it  was  yet  day."  Nophakh-nephesh,  again :  she 
hath  breathed  out  her  being,  or  ceased  to  breathe. 

Mat.  27 :  50,  Authorized  version :  "  Jesus  when  he 
had  cried  again  with  a  loud  voice,  yielded  up  the  ghost.'*'* 
Mark  15  :  37,  "  Gave  up  the  ghost."  Luke  23  :  46,  "Fa- 
ther,  into  thy  hands  I  commend  my  spirit :  and  having 


96  .^  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

said  this,  he  gave  up  theghosty  John  19  :  30,  ''  He  bow- 
ed his  head  and  gave  up  the  ghost."  Verse  33,  "  But 
when  they  came  to  Jesus,  and  saw  that  he  was  dead  al- 
ready, they  brake  not  his  legs  :  but  one  of  the  soldiers 
with  a  spear  pierced  his  side,  and  forthwith  came  there- 
out blood  and  water."  In  Math.,  "  apheke  to  pneuma''' ; 
he  yielded  up  his  breath,  or  expired.  Mark,  exepneuse^ 
he  breathed  out  his  breath,  or  expired.  I^uke,  exeptneu- 
sen^  expired.  John,  paredoke  to  pneuma^  resigned  his 
spirit,  or  breath,  or  life.  Apheke  to  pneuma^  as  in  Math., 
he  yielded  up  his  breath,  or  expired,  w^as  a  common 
phrase  in  heathen  Greece.  See  Emipedes,  Hecuba,  569  : 
epci  d?  apheke  pneuma  thaiiasimo  sphage^  when  she  had 
exjnred  by  the  deadly  blow.  As  the  Greek  of  Mark  and 
Luke  affirm  that  Jesus  expired^  the  expressions  of  Mat- 
thew and  John  must  be  construed  in  accordance  with 
them,  which  indeed  is  their  obvious  import. 

We  cannot  pass  by  this  important  passage  without  a 
fuller  investigation  of  the  question.  Did  Christ  truly  die  ? 
If  he  did  not,  we  ''  are  yet  in  our  sins,"  under  the  con- 
demnation of  a  law^  that  consigns  us  to  death,  to  nothing- 
ness, and  to  '^  dust"  If  Christ  did  not  die,  did  not 
become  entirely  unconscious,  he  of  course  could  not 
rise  from  a  state  of  death ;  and  those  w  ho  have  fallen 
asleep  in  Christ,  as  well  as  all  the  rest  of  mankind  that 
have  died,  have  already  perished,  without  a  vestige  of  a 
hope  of  iiE-living.  But  if  Christ  died,  and  has  risen 
again,  then  has  he  ransomed  his  people  from  the  grave, 
and  he  will  come  again,  and  call  them  from  thence,  to  be 
for  ever  with  himself  in  his  kingdom.  But  this  passage 
has  been  unwarrantably  altered  by  the  mother  of  harlots 
and  abominations  of  the  earth;  and  w^e  are  indebted  to 
Granville  Penn,  and  the  researches  of  Bentleyand  Birch 
for  the  restoration  of  this  highly  important  text.  This 
clause  should  be  inserted  in  Mat.  27  :  50,  "  Alios  de  ki- 
bon,  logchen,  enuxen  autou  ten  pleuran,  kai  exelthen 
udor  kai  a:ma."  The  whole  verse  anciently  read  some- 
thing like  this  ;  after  stating  the  fact  that  vinegar  was 
offered  to  Jesus,  it  is  added — [*'  but  another,  taking  a 
spear,  pierced  his  side ;  and  there  came  forth  water  and 
blood]  and  Jesus,  crying  out  again"  [i.  e.,  as  before,] 
*'  with  a  loud  voice,  expired." 

We  have  placed  the  words  which  have  been  so  shame- 


t3HRIST   TRULY   DIED.  97 

fully  suppressed  in  brackets.  This  reading  is  sustained  by 
the  two  oldest  MSB.,  the  Vatican^  Sind  Ephrem  ;  by  the 
copies  of  Diadorus,  Tatian,  and  various  other  holy  fa- 
thers, (Schol.  Cod.,  72);  by  the  ancient  Jerusalem,  Syriac 
and  Ethiopic  versions  ;  by  some  of  the  most  ancient  La- 
tin versions;  and  in  six  other  MSS,  (L.,  5,  48,  67,  115^ 
^nd  127  of  Wetstein).  Eemember  that  one  ancient  MSS. 
of  the  fourth  or  fifth  century,  is  more  intrinsically  valua- 
ble, and  is  better  authority  than  hundreds  of  MSS.  of 
the  eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries,  which  have  all  suffer- 
ed in  transcription,  and  can  never  be  more  perfect  than 
those  from  which  they  have  been  so  often  recopied. 

This  doctrine  harmonizes  with  every  other  Scripture. 
*'  I  lay  down  my  hfe  of  myself,"  is  equal  to,  I  voluntarily 
submit  myself  to  an  instrument,  or  cause  producing 
death.  "  I  have  power  to  take  (my  life)  again."  And 
so  has  every  Christian.  But  this  power  resides  not  in 
himself;  but  in  Christ  who  will  confer  it.  So  Christ  was 
raised  by  the  power  of  God.  "  Enoch  was  translated 
that  he  should  not  see  death^''  but  Christ  truly  died  for 
ns.  The  whole  gospel  rests  upon  this  foundation  ;  that 
Christ  the  Lord,  the  Holy  One,  did  die,  according  to  the 
natural  law  of  death  pronounced  upon  Adam  and  his 
posterity.  "^^  He  became  obedient  to  death ;"  was  "  Led 
as  a  sheep  to  the  slaughter;"  "He  tasted  dea,th  for 
tivery  man."  *'  He  took  upon  himself  our  curse  of  death, 
5;md  hung  upon  the  tree.^'  He  prophesied  that  he  should 
be  dehvered  to  the  gentiles,  and  that  they  would  kill 
him.  He  is  said  to  be  killed  ;  to  be  slain  ;  diacheirizes- 
tliai^  to  be  dispatched  ;  anaireisthai,  to  be  made  away  ; 
ajwlesthai^  to  perish  ;  to  be  cut  off;  to  be  slaughtered; 
and  theiesthai^  to  be  sacrificed ;  which  words  all  import 
a  true  and  proper  death.  Eor  remarks  on  the  death  of 
Christ  in  the  sense  of  ceasing  to  exist  in  any  form  as  a 
living  conscious  being,  see  27th  sermon  on  the  creeds  by 
Isaac  Barrow,  vol.  2,  p.  382.  But  if  Jesus  ""yielded  up 
his  ghost^''  as  a  living  separate  spirit,  then  in  no  sense  did 
Jesus  Christ  himself  die. 

SS*  The  passage.  Mat.  27  :  50,  of  the  piercing  of 
Christ  prior  to  his  death,  was  condemned  in  the  four- 
teenth century,  by  Popes  Clement  V.,  and  his  successor 
John.  We  may  regard  it  as  a  general  rule,  that  w^her- 
ever  the  Scriptures  have  been  designedly  altered  to  sus- 


VO  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

tain  a  favorite  doctrine,  it  is  a  confession  of  its  upholders, 
that  the  Scriptures  do  not  plainly  teach  the  doctrine,  and 
that  the  doctrine  itself  is  an  invention  of  men. 

Oh,  immortal-soulism,  what  hast  thou  done  ?  Thou 
hast  corrupted  the  word  of  the  living  God,  in  a  point 
vitally  affecting  the  salvation  of  the  race  1  Thou  hast  sub- 
verted the  very  foundations  of  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ 
the  Son  of  God  1  Thou  hast  perverted  the  account  of 
the  most  precious  boon  of  God,  the  gift  of  his  Son ; 
and  thou  hast  concealed  the  glorious  fact,  that  the  Son 
of  God  gave  himself,  his  life,  for  us,  to  ransom  us  from 
the  dominion  of  death,  the  grave !  Thou  hast  arrogated 
continued  conscious  existence  to  thyself,  which  belongs 
to  him  whom  no  man  hath  seen  nor  can  see,  the  only  God, 
who  only  hath  immortality  [  Thou  hast  despised  the 
precious  gift  of  God,  which  is  eternal  life^  by  claiming  it 
independently  of  his  peculiar  gift  I  Thou  hast  plucked 
the  brightest  diadem  from  the  head  of  him  who  is  the 
Eesurrection  and  the  Life,  as  being  the  only  medium 
through  whom  the  gift  of  immortality  is  bestowed,  and 
hast  claimed  it  as  being  already  thine,  in  virtue  of  thy 
relation  to  the  first  Adam  I  Thou  hast  rendered  the 
stupendous  sacrifice  of  Christ  useless,  unmeaning,  and 
unnecessary  1  Thou  hast  fostered  the  pride  and  inde- 
pendence of  thy  race,  and  hast '  prevented  many  from 
laying  hold  of  that  which  is  life  indeed,  te$  o7itos  zoes  / 
(1  Tim.  6  :  19.)  Thou  hast  "  changed  the  truth  of  God 
into  a  he,"  and  hast  virtually  acknowledged  that  the  ser- 
pent spake  the  truth  when  he  said,  Ye  shall  not  surely 
die  !  But  enough.  "Oh  my  soul,  come  not  thou  into 
their  secret ;  unto  their  assembly,  mine  honor,  be  not 
thou  united." 

Stephen's  case  considered,  with  others. 

Acts  7 :  59,  "  And  they  stoned  Stephen,  calling  upon 
God,  and  saying,  Lord  Jesus, — dexai  to piteuma  mou^ — 
receive  my  spirit.  And  he  kneeled  down,  and  cried  with 
a  loud  voice.  Lord,  lay  not  this  sin  to  their  charge.  And 
when  he  had  said  this,  he  fell  asleep.  And  Saul  was 
consenting  unto  his  death,.., And  devout  men  carried 
Stephen  to  his  burial." 

The  grammar  of  the  text  charges  the  saying,  "  Lord 


NO  AUTHORITY  FOR  THE  TERM  OHOST.        99 

Jesus,  receive  my  spirit,"  upon  the  wicked  Jews,  and 
afterwards  records  what  Stephen  did  and  said.  We 
waive  this,  being  wilHng  to  allow  that  the  translators 
were  fallible,  and  attribute  both  sayings  to  Stephen. 
Dexaij  means  the  right,  cheir^  hand^  being  understood ; 
metaphorically  it  means  assistance,  aid,  strength,  courage ; 
and  is  equal  to  the  expression,  "  Lord  Jesus,  strengthen 
my  spirit"  ;  or  nerve  me  up  to  endurance ;  and  after  this 
Stephen  himself  ^^  feli^  asleep"  ;  and  the  Evangelist  re- 
cords Stephen's  "  death ^'''^  and  the  carrying  of  Stephen's 
self  to  the  grave.  We  would  give  the  meaning  of  the 
59th  v.,  thus  :  "And  the  Jews  stoned  Stephen,  while 
he  was  invoking  the  Lord,  and  saying.  Lord  Jesus,  assist 
me  to  suffer." 

The  expression  of  our  Saviour  in  Luke  23  :  46,  "  Fa 
ther,  into  thy  hands" — parathesomai  to  pneuma  mou — 
translated,  "I  commend  my  spirit," j^ara,  intensive; 
thesis^  pledge,  or  a  deposite  to  be  carefully  reserved.  1 
deposite  my  life  as  a  treasure  to  be  reserved  till  thou 
raisest  me  to  life  again.  "  I  commit  the  care  of  my  life 
to  thee."  Pneuma^  the  principle  of  life,  being  put  for 
life  itself  In  Ps.  31  :  5,  is  a  similar  phrase.  Paul  com- 
mends himself  to  God  in  a  similar  way.  2  Tim.  1:12, 
"  I  know  whom  I  have  believed,  and  am  persuaded  that 
he  is  able  to  keep  that  which  I  have  committed  unto 
him,  (eis)  unto  that  day."  Also,  1  Pet.  4  :  19,  "  Where 
fore,  let  them  that  suffer  according  to  the  will  of  God 
commit  the  keeping  of  their  souls  to  him  in  well-doing, 
as  unto  a  faithful  Creator."  "  Their  souls,"  means  their 
persons,  their  existence. 

Acts  5:5,  "  Ananias  hearing  these  words  fell  down  and 
peson  exepsuxe^  [gave  up  the  ghost]."  Verse  10,  "  Then 
fell  she  down  strait  way  at  his  feet,  and  exepsuxeny 
[yielded  up  the  ghost]."  Both  these  expressions  are 
equal  to,  "  exhaled  their  life."  They  breathed  out  their 
breath.  There  is  no  ghost  about  these  expressions,  ex- 
cept what  was  in  the  imagination  of  the  translators,  biased 
by  Pagan  tradition. 

We  have  now  examined  all  the  cases  of  ghosts  we 
read  of  in  the  authorized  version,  and  find  them  all  fabri- 
cations. We  have  found  the  words  gova^  wasted  away ; 
nophakh-nepheshy  breathed  out  the  breath ;  pneuma^ 
principle  of  life;    expsttche^  expired;    and   expressions 


100  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION* 

compounded  of  breathing  and  spririt,  translated  by  the 
^vord  '' ghost ,''  without  the  shghtest  authority.  But  we 
will  examine  a  few  more  expressions  to  ascertain  whether 
there  be  any  term  equivalent  to  a  soul,  spirit,  or  ghost, 
that  can  live  separately  from  the  man  himself,  or  his 
body. 

Job  4 :  13,  "  Amid  disturbed  thoughts  from  visions  of  the  night, 
When  deep  sleep  had  fallen  upon  men, 

14.  A  palpitation  came  on  me,  and  a  tremor, 
And  made  the  whole  of  my  bones  to  shake  ! 

15.  And  a  (ruah)  spirit  passed  before  me, 
The  hair  of  my  flesh  rose  on  end ! 

16.  It  stood  still,  but  I  could  not  discern  its  countenance, 
A  shape  was  before  mine  eyes  ; 

There  was  a  stillness,  and  I  heard  a  voice: 

17.  *  Shall  a  mortal  bejusc  before  Eloah? 

Before  his  Maker  shall e?^o^^5/^, mortal  man,  be  cleared'?" 

We  confess  we  no  not  understand  this  transaction.  It 
might  have  been  a  vision,  or  an  optical  illusion ;  but  as 
Eliphaz  is  subsequently  condemned  by  God,  we  need  not 
receive  it  as  inspiration.  At  all  events,  whatever  may 
have  been  the  nature  of  the  phantom,  it  was  not  the 
ghost  of  a  man,  and  it  displayed  more  wisdom  than  men 
now  possess,  for  they  have  not  yet  learned  that  they  are 
mortal. 

Mat.  14 :  26,  "  And  when  the  disciples  saw  him  walk- 
ing on  the  sea,  they  were  troubled,  saying  it  is  a  spirit  j 
and  they  cried  out  for  fear."  Mark  6  :  49,  "  They  sup- 
posed it  had  been  a  spirit."  In  both  these  places  the 
Greek  is  phantasma^  and  ought  to  have  been  translated 
a  phantom  ;  that  is,  an  optical  illusion,  an  apparition,  an 
appearance. 

Luke  24 :  37,  "  They  supposed  that  they  had  seen  a 
spirit."  Verse  39,  "  It  is  I :  for  a  spirit  hath  not  flesh 
and  bones.''  In  this  place,  Griesbach  puts  phantasma 
in  the  margin,  which  doubtless  is  the  true  reading. 
Those  who  have  read  the  "  Diary  of  a  Physician,"  or 
kindred  publications,  know  that  when  these  are  not  opti- 
cal illusions,  they  exist  only  in  the  diseased  brain,  and  it 
requires  a.  strong  effort  of  the  mind  to  be  assured  that 
they  are  not  realities. 

Luke  8 :  52,  55,  He  said,  "  She  is  not  dead,  but  sleep- 


VARIOUS  USES  OP  THE  TERM  SPIRIT.  101 

eth....and  he  took  her  by  the  hand,  saying,  Maid,  arise. 
And  her  spirit  came  again,  and  she  arose."  Kai  epes- 
trepse  to  pneuma  antes.  She  may  have  been  in  a  state 
of  aphixia,  as  would  seem  by  the  expression,  "  Not  dead, 
but  sleepeth."  Then  the  expression  may  mean  no  more 
than  she  revived.  Compare  Judges  15  :  19,  "  And  when 
he  had  drunk,  his  rwa/i," — translated  "  spirit  (his  anima- 
tion) came  again" ;  also,  1  Sam.  30  :  12,  "  And  when  he 
had  eaten,  his  ruah^  his  spirit,  came  again  to  him."  If 
the  spirits  in  these  cases  w^ere  ghosts,  and  went  from 
them,  they  would  have  been  dead  ;  but  they  eat  and 
drank  to  bring  back  the  ghost!  In  Sam.  1  :  11,  16,  19, 
three  times  is  the  soul  brought  back  again  to  those  that 
were  starving,  by  eating  meat.  See  margin.  Similar 
forms  of  expression  occur  in  Ezk.  38  :  8 ;  Gen.  42 :  28 ; 
margin,  ''  Their  heart  went  forth" ;  2  Kings  5  :  14,  "  His 
flesh  came  again."  These  idiomatic  expressions  suffi- 
ciently explain  the  phrase,  "  her  spirit  came  again."  We 
trust  we  have  "  laid  all  these  gobHns"  so  that  they  will 
not  again  perplex  men  of  plain  understandings. 

Spirit  means  vigor ^  courage,  animation.  The  ruah  of 
Jacob  revived  when  he  heard  that  Joseph  was  alive. 
Their  heart  melted,  neither  was  there  ruah  in  them  any 
more.  There  was  no  more  ruah  in  her.  Gen.  45  :  27  : 
Josh.  5  :  1  ;  1  Kings  10  :  5.  We  will  give  an  exposition 
of  Zech.  12 :  1,  under  the  next  head. 

SPIRIT  OFTEN  MEANS  MIND,  TEMPER,  DISPOSITION. 

The  words  ruah  and  pneuma  are  used  to  signify  the 
mind  about  two  hundred  times ;  but  the  heart,  hands, 
and  eyes,  are  used  for  the  mind.  The  heart  is  used  for 
the  mind  in  nine  hundred  and  fifty-five  places ;  but  the 
heart  does  not  perform  the  functions  of  thought ;  though 
the  brain  cannot  develop  mind  unless  it  be  supplied  with 
blood  containing  the  spirit  or  principle  of  Hfe,  which  has  its 
centre  in  the  heart.  No  wonder  then  that  the  heart  and 
spirit,  by  a  figure  of  speech,  are  used  for  the  mind  itself 
Pharoah  and  Nebuchadnezzar  had  dreams  that  troubled 
their  ruah.  Gen.  41:8;  Dan.  2:1,3.  In  Dan.  4  :  19, 
it  is  said  that  it  was  "his  thoughts  that  troubled  him.'''' 
Gen.  26 :  25,  "  Which  were  bitterness  of  ruah  unto  Re- 
bekah" ;  tr.,  '^  grief  of  mind."    Exo,  6  ;  9,  The  Israelites 


102  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION 

*^  hearkened  not  unto  Moses  for  anguish  of  ruah^^  dis- 
tress of  mind.  Ecc.  7  :  8,  9,  "  The  patient  in  ruah  is  bet- 
ter than  the  proud  in  ruah.  Be  not  hasty  in  thy  ruah 
to  be  angry."  Spirit  is  here  used  for  mind  ;  though  the 
margin  makes  the  walking  of  the  ruah^  the  walking  of 
the  soul ;  it  evidently  means  gentleness  of  temper.  Lk. 
1:  17,  John  "shall  go  before  him  in  the  spirit  and 
power  of  Elijah,"  with  the  same  inflexible  disposition. 
John  surely  did  not  appear  in  the  ghost  of  Elijah.  1 
Cor.  16  :  18,  "  For  they  have  refreshed  my  spirit,  (mind) 
and  yours."  2  Cor.  2  :  13,  "  I  had  no  rest  in  my  spirit 
(mind)  because  I  found  not  Titus."  Acts  19  :  21  ;  18: 
5,  Paul  "  purposed  in  spirit" ;  "  was  pressed  in  spirit." 
This  is  a  sample  of  the  way  in  which  the  word  spirit 
is  often  used. 

Zech.  12  :  1,  "  The  burden  of  the  word  of  the  Lord  for 
Israel,  saith  the  Lord,  which  stretcheth  forth  the  heavens, 
and  layeth  the  foundations  of  the  earth,  and  formeth  the 
spirit  of  man  within  him.  Behold  I  will  make  Jerusa- 
lem a  cup  of  trembling  unto  all  the  people  round  about, 
when  they  shall  be  in  the  siege." 

This  text  has  been  dwelt  upon,  as  though  it  ajBforded 
undoubted  evidence  of  the  separate  conscious  existence 
of  the  spirit  of  man.  But  does  it  say  so  ?  ^y  no 
means.  God  formed  the  heart  of  man  within  him. 
Shall  we  rush,  therefore,  to  the  illogical  conclusion,  that 
the  heart  is  sELF-conscious,  and  can  live  independently 
of  the  man,  or  of  his  body  ?  and  especially  as  we  are 
plainly  informed  that  the  Lord  God  formed  man  of  the 
dust  of  the  ground.  If  the  spirit  be  the  essential  man, 
as  our  opponents  argue,  then  was  the  spirit  formed  of 
the  dust  of  the  ground?  Luke  11  :  40,  "  Foolish  men, 
did  not  he  that  formed  that  which  is  without^  form  that 
which  is  within^  also  ?"  The  passage  says,  that  God 
formed  the  spirit  of  man  within  him^ — not  that  God 
formed  a  separate  spirit,  that  was,  or  could  be  conscious 
outside  of  the  man,  and  then  put  this  independent  spirit 
within  him. 

As  there  are  fifty-four  diflferent  spirits  dwelling  in 
man,  as  we  prove,  we  ask  our  opponents  which  of  these 
spirits  God  formed  within  him  ?  Can  we  not  suppose 
that  one  of  them  is  meant,  which  is  not  a  separate 
ghost  ?    And,  now  we  enquire,  what  spirit  ?— I.  What 


VARIOUS  USES  OF  THE  TERM  SPIRIT  103 

did  God  design  to  express,  in  the  passage  under  con- 
sideration ?  Certainly  not  the  specific  manner  in  which 
God  created  man,  but  the  great  fact,  that  as  God  was 
the  creator  of  the  mind  of  man,  as  well  as  of  the  heavens 
and  the  earth,  therefore  he  possesses  both  the  power 
and  authority  to  make  him  tremble  before  him.  This 
seems  to  be  the  obvious  meaning  of  this  exceedingly  po- 
<itical  passage.  2.  Whal  spirit  is  meciM  d  The  inseparable 
prefix,  ^,  translated  i^itltbiy  has  at  least  twenty-five  dif- 
ferent meanings  ;  and  the  wx)rd,  ruah^  translated,  spirit , 
has  more  than  sixty  different  meanings.  We  cull  out  a 
few,  either  of  which  the  reader  may  choose,  as  a  sy- 
nonysrn  for  ruah^  m  this  passage  :  1,  breath ;  2,  the 
principle  of  life  eontajjied  in  the  breath;  hence,  3,  the 
spirit  of  lives,  by  which  all  animals  live  ;  4,  fife  ;  5, 
mind  ;  G,  disposition  ;  7,  animation  ;  8,  vigor  ;  9,  intel- 
lectual and  moral  faculties,  as  opposed  to  those  that  are 
possessed  by  other  animals  ;  and,  10,  understanding. 
We  select  the  second  and  tenth,  and  say,  God  "  formeth 
the  spirit  of  lives  which  is  in  man  ;"  or  those  instrumen- 
talities that  cause  life.  Or,  Job  32  :  8,  '  There  is  a  spirit 
[of  tvisdom^]  in  man  :  and  (ne^Jiomok)  the  breath  of  the 
Almighty  giveth  them  {under stcmdi^ig.y^  Let  the 
reader  study  all  we  have  written  upon  spirit  before  he 
draws  an  unjust  inference  from  this  isolated  text.  He 
who  pertinaciously  quotes  this  text,  to  sustain  the  Pagan 
fable,  forfeits  all  claim  to  candor. 

SPfRIT    RIEANS    THE    MIND. 

Ezek.  13:  3,  ''  Wo  unto  the  foolish  prophets  that 
follow  their  own  spirit,"  (their  own  mind.)  I  Cor.  16  : 
18,  ^^  They  have  refreshed  my  spirit  and  yours,"  (my 
mind  and  your  mitid.)  2  Cor.  2  :  13,  ^'  I  had  no  rest  in 
iny  spirit,  (mind,)  because  I  found  not  Titus,  my 
brother."  Acts  19  :  21,  Paul  "  purposed  in  spirit,  (in 
mirjd,)  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem."  There  are  many  ex- 
amples of  thi-s  kind,  that  the  reader  will  readily  acknow- 
ledge ;  such  as  Acts  20 :  22  :  1  TinL  4  :  12  j  Phil.*'l ;  7; 
I  Chron.  5  :  26  ;  EccL  1  :  17  ;  &a. 


104  BIBLE  VS.    TRADITiarr. 

THE  WORD  "  spirit"   IS  USED  INSTEAD  OF  "  HEART,*'  OR 
"  MIND." 

"We  could  have  given  a  table,  where  the  heart  is 
used  for  the  mind  in  nine  hundred  and  fifty-five  places. 
Dan.  7  :  15,  "I,,  Daniel,  was  grieved  in  my  spirit  in 
the  midst  of  my  body,  and  the  visions  of  my  head 
troubled  me."  The  heart  often  means  the  midst ;  and 
seven  times  is  so  translated.  Exod.  28  :  3,  "  Speak 
unto  all  that  are  wise-hearted,  (wise-minded,)  whom  I 
have  filled  with  the  spirit  of  wisdom  ;"  (mind  of  wisdom.) 
Exod.  35  :  21,  "  And  they  came,  every  one  whose  heart 
stirred  him  up,  and  every  one  whom  his  spirit  made 
willing."  Here  heart,  mind,  and  spirit,  e\ddently  mean 
the  same.  In  21  ver.  it  says,  "  their  spirit  made  them 
willing  ;"  in  29  ver.  '^tbat  their  heart  made  them  wil- 
ling." Eom.  5 :  5,  ''  Because  the  love  of  God  is  shed 
abroad  in  our  hearts."  2  Cor.  1  :  22,  "  Who  hath  also 
sealed  us,  and  given  the  earnest  of  the  spirit  in  our 
hearts."  Gal.  4  :  6^  "  G^od.  hath  sent  forth  the  spirit  of 
his  Son  into  our  hearts,  crying,  Abba,  Father."  Rom. 
8 :  16,  "  This  selfsame  spirit,  beareth  witness  with  our 
spirits,  that  v/e  are  the  children  of  God."  Thus  our 
adoption  into  the  family  of  God,,  is  evidenced  in  three 
places  to  the  hearty  and  o-nly  once  to  the  spirit.  Cer- 
tainl}^,  then,,  this  testimony  is  not  made  to  a  ghost- 
Where  the  heart,  and  soul,  and  spirit  are  used  in  the 
same  connection,  the  heart  is  put  first,  as  having  the 
pre-eminence.  AVhy  ?  The  heart  represents  the  afiec- 
tions  of  the  mind  ;  the  spirit,  the  rational  faculties  of 
the  mind  ;  and  the  soul^  the  whole  person.  Mark  12 : 
30,  "  Thou  Shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy 
hearty  and  with  all  thy  soul^  and  with  all  thy  mind,  and 
with  all  thy  strength^  Now,  it  would  be  just  as  reason- 
able to  infer  that  the  heart  was  a  separate  living  entity, 
and  had  a  separate  conscious  existence,  and  was  immor- 
tal, as  it  would  be  to  say  the  same  thing  of  either  soul 
or  spirit.  Nay,  more  reasonable,  than  to  talk  of ''  death- 
less spirits,"  because  the  heart  is  susceptible  of  life, 
while  the  spirit  is  not.  In  Ps.  69 :  32,  ''  And  your 
heart  shall  live  that  seek  God  ;"  and,Ps.  22 :  26,  "  They 
shall  praise  the  Lord  that  seek  him :  your  heart  shall 


VARIOUS  USES  OF  THE  TERM  SPIRIT.  105 

live  for  ever."     But  where  is  life   attributed  to  these 
fabulous  "  deathless  spirits  ?" 

We  will  pause  a  little,  in  the  progress  of  our  investi- 
gation of  spirit ;  and  proceed  to  examine  a  few  texts  of 
a  different  class.  We  have  denied  the  separate  con- 
scious existence  of  the  spirit  of  man.  We  have  already 
proved  that  spirit  has  many  meanings. 

1  Cor.  2  :  11,  "  For  what  man  knoweth  the  things  of 
a  man,  save  the  spirit  of  a  man  that  is  in  him  ?  Even 
so  the  things  of  God  knoweth  no  man,  but  the  spirit  of 
God."  It  is  here  clearly  implied  that  knowledge  belongs 
to  the  man,  and  the  spirit  is  not  the  man,  but  is  in  the 
man.  Is  not  the  spirit  here,  the  mind  and  conscious- 
ness ?  The  meaning  seems  to  be,  that,  as  only  the  man 
himself  is  conscious  of  the  plans  and  intentions  of  his 
own  mind,  and  no  other  man  can  know  them,  unless  he 
reveal  them  ;  so  God  alone  is  conscious  of  the  workings 
of  his  own  mind,  and  the  spirit  of  God  alone  can  reveal 
his  purposes,  and  the  hidden  things  of  God.  But  read 
Harwood's  translation:  10  v.  "But  to  us  hath  God 
been  pleased  to  reveal  by  his  spirit  these  glorious  dis- 
coveries ;  for  the  spirit  explores  all  things,  and  dives 
into  the  profound  depths  of  the  divine  counsels."  11  v. 
^'  For  as  it  is  the  mind  alone  of  one  man  that  judges  of 
the  temper  and  disposition  of  another  :  so  it  is  the  spirit 
of  God  that  is  acquainted  with  the  measures  and  desigias 
of  the  Supreme." 

2  Cor.  4  :  13,  "  We  have  the  same  spirit  of  faith  .... 
knowing  that  he  which  raised  up  the  Lord  Jesus,  shall 
raise  up  us  also  by  Jesus,  and  shall  present  us  with  you. 
....  For  which  cause  we  faint  not ;  for  though  our 
outward  man  perish,  yet  the  inward  [man]  is  renewed 
day  by  day."  It  is  evident  here,  that  Paul's  hope  was 
founded  upon  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  not  in 
the  possession  of  a  something  that  could  be  abstracted 
from  himself  But  what  is  this  something  ?  for  man  is 
not  in  the  Greek.  The  disposition  and  mind  of  God 
and  Christ.  It  was  the  spirit  of  "  Christ  formed  within 
him,  the  hope  of  glory."  Col.  1  :  27.  It  was  "  the 
hidden  man  of  the  heart,"  of  1  Pet.  3:4.  In  Eph.  3  : 
16,  Paul  prays  that  God  may  grant  you  "  To  be 
strengthened  with  might  by  his  spirit  in  the  inner  man," 


106  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION, 

which  he  immediately  explains,  "  That  Christ  may  dwell 
in  your  hearts  by  faith."  In  Rom.  7  :  22,  Paul  makes 
his  mind,  or  rational  faculties,  the  "  inward  man." 

SPIRIT  IS  USED  FOR  TEMPER,  AND  DISPOSITION  OF  MIND. 

Num.  14  :  24,  "  Caleb  had  another  spirit;"  a  different 
disposition.  Pro  v.  16  :  32,  "  He  that  ruleth  his  spirit, 
(his  temper,)  is  better  than  he  that  taketh  a  city."  Pro  v. 
17:27,  "A  man  of  understanding  is  of  an  excellent 
spirit;"  (temper.)  1  Cor.  4:  21,  ''  Shall  I  come  unto 
you  with  a  rod,  or  in  love,  and  in  the  spirit  of  meek- 
ness ?"  (in  a  mild  temper.)  Eph.  4 :  23,  "  And  be 
renewed  in  the  spirit,  (disposition,)  of  your  mind."  But 
it  is  needless  to  quote  further.  We  will  name  a  few  of 
the  spirits  that  dwell  in  man  :  the  Spirit  of  God— of 
Christ — of  love — of  power — of  grace — of  judgment — of 
knowledge — of  wisdom — of  a  sound  mind— of  your 
mind — of  faith — of  fear — of  bondage — -a  meek  spirit — a 
quiet  spirit — a  spirit  of  supplication — a  spirit  of  the  world 
— a  spirit  of  slumber — a  spirit  of  ant i- Christ,  &c.,  &c. 
As  it  would  be  easy  to  enumerate  fifty  or  sixty  different 
spirits  in  man,  we  might  ask  our  opponents  are  all  these 
immortal  ghosts  ?  Surely  man  might  be  called  legion^ 
for  he  is  many.  Or,  if  they  demur,  we  might  ask  them, 
which  of  these  spirits  belonging  to  man  is  ''  deathless  ?" 

SPIRIT  IS  USED  TO  REPPvESENT  TIJE  WHOLE  PERSON. 

This  is  an  unusual  meaning  of  the  word,  and  we  shall 
quote  every  place  where  we  think  it  occurs  in  this  sense. 
I  John  4 :  1-5,  "  Believe  not  every  spirit,  (person,)  but 
try  the  spirits,  (persons,)  whether  they  be  of  God.  Be- 
cause  many  false  prophets,  (propounders  of  false  doc- 
trines,) have  gone  out  into  the  world.  They  are  of  the 
world  :  therefore  speak  they  of  the  world,  aiid  the  world 
heareth  tJiemy  These  spirits  are  real  tangible  persons, 
which  every  person  may  readily  see  and  hear,  in  these 
days  of  theological  fables.  Eight  times  in  this  chapter 
is  spirit  used  for  the  person.  Heb.  12:  9,  ^'  Shall  we 
not  much  rather  be  in  subjection  to  the  Father  of  spirits^ 
and  live  ?"  Ver.  22.  "  But  ye  are  come  unto  Mount  Zion, 
and  to  the  spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect." 


VARIOUS  USES  OP  THE  TERM  SPIRIT.  107 

These  spirits  are  certainly  persons  belonging  to  the  true 
Church.  See  2  Thes.  2  :  2  ;  1  Cor,  5  :  5.  So  1  Pet.  3  : 
19.  Those  to  whom  Noah  preached,  "the  spirits  that 
are  now  in  sepulchres  ;"  (see  Syriac  version,)  were  the 
antedeluvians,  Hving  in  his  day,  and  eight  of  these  souls, 
or  spirits,  entered  into  the  ark  and  saved  their  lives  ; 
and  the  rest  of  the  spirits  were  drowned  in  the  flood. 
These  same  spirits,  or  persons,  are  probably  alluded  to 
again,  1  Pet.  4 :  6,  "  Por  this  cause  was  the  gospel 
preached  to  them  that  are  dead  ;"  (the  spirits  to  whom 
Noah- preached.)  If  they  are  meant,  then  are  they  dead 
spirits^  or  persons.  So  thought  Milton.  But  the  verse 
is  by  no  means  clear. 


108 


CHAPTER  VII. 


IS  THE   SPIRIT  OF  MAN  IMMORTALS 

OR,  CAN  IT  FAIL  BEFORE  GOD  ?  AS  OUR  MOTTO  IMPLIES  THAT 
IT  CAN  ? 

This  is  an  important  question,  and  we  are  now  fully 
prepared  to  answer  it.  "We  have  distinctly  defined,  from 
the  Bible,  what  is  the  spirit  of  man.  Primarily^  that  it 
is  a  principle  of  life  contained  in  the  breath  ;  2ndly,  That 
the  container  is  put  for  the  contained,  that  it  is  breath ; 
3rdly,  That  as  none  of  the  results  of  life  can  take  place 
without  the  animating  principle,  so  the  various  tempers 
and  faculties  of  the  mind  are  called  spirit.  But  spirit, 
though  it  be  the  cause  of  life,  is  not  life  itself,  and  al- 
though a  subtle  agent,  it  cannot  manifest  any  of  the 
powers  of  life  in  an  abstracted  state.  But  with  the  spirit, 
an  organized  breathing  frame  is  enabled  by  God  to  mani- 
fest the  energies  of  hfe.  It  is  therefore  the  flesh  that 
lives,  the  body  that  lives,  and  the  spirit  does  not  live  at 
all !  Hence  the  terms,  mortal  flesh,  mortal  body,  and 
mortal  man ;  these  can  live,  and  these  can  die.  But  the 
spirit,  not  being  an  organized  substance,  can  neither  live 
nor  die — is  neither  mortal  nor  immortal.  So,  as  the 
spirit  of  man  has  never  lived,  it  can  never  be  said  to  die. 
Hence  this  spirit  is  never  said  to  die,  or  to  be  killed,  but 
"  to  be  gathered"  by  God  ;  "  to  go  to  God" ;  "  to  be 
taken  away" ;  to  be  '^  cut  off"  ;  to  be  ^'  blown  out"  ;  to 
"  go  forth"  ;  to  be  "  breathed  out"  ;  to  be  ''  expired" ; 
to  be  "  put  out"  ;  and  such  like  expressions  are  used  re- 
specting it. 

It  is  eaid  to  be  the  Spirit  of  God ;  and  sometimes 


IS  THE  SPIRIT  OF  MAN  IMMORTAL?  109 

called  the  breath  of  God.  Job  34  :  14, "  If  God  set  his 
heart  upon  man,  if  he  gather  unto  himself  his  spirit  and 
his  breath  ;  all  flesh  shall  perish  together,  and  man  shall 
turn  again  unto  dust."  It  is  God's  spirit  and  God's 
breath  by  which  men  live,  which  is  gathered  to  himself 
again.  Ps.  104:29,  "Thou  hidest  thy  face,  they  are 
troubled :  thou  takest  away  their  (nesme)  breath,  they 
die^  and  return  to  their  dust.  Thou  sendest  forth  thy 
{ruah)  spirit,  they  are  created  :  and  thou  renewest  the 
face  of  the  earth."  Ps.  146  :  4,  "  His  {nesme)  breath 
goethforth^  he  returneth  to  the  earth  ;  in  that  very  day 
his  thoughts  perish." 

A  writer  in  the  Methodist  Quarterly  Review  for  April, 
1852,  endeavors  to  avert  the  force  of  this  text  by  a  criti- 
cism on  the  word  "  thoughtsy  Suppose  that  word  were 
entirely  stricken  out  of  the  text,  then  if  he  (the  man) 
"  returneth  to  his  earth,"  it  necessarily  follows  that  all 
that  belongs  to  him  as  man  must  perish ;  including,  of 
course,  his  thoughts.  Can  dust  think  ?  But  the  word 
is  eshtonhouth^  thoughts,  purposes,  resolutions ;  and  oc- 
curs in  Job  12  :  5,  where  it  cannot  mean  the  result  of 
thought,  as  our  critic  argues,  but  must  mean  thought  or 
imagination.  "  He  that  is  ready  to  slip  with  his  feet,  is 
as  a  lamp  despised  in  the  thought  of  him  that  is  at  ease." 
Isa.  57  :  16,  "  I  will  not  contend  for  ever,  neither  will  I 
be  always  wroth :  for  the  (ruah)  spirit  should  fail  before 
me,  and  the  {nesme)  breath  which  I  have  made."  But, 
as  if  to  make  this  matter  doubly  plain,  we  find  in  Job  12 : 
10,  For  in  God's  "  hand  is  the  nephesh  (soul  or  hfe)  of 
every  living  thing,  and  the  (rz^a^)  spirit  of  all  mankind." 
And  the  much  abused  text,  Eco.  12 :  5-7,  confirms  this 
view.  When  "  man  goeth  to  his  long  home.".. ..verse  7, 
"  Then  shall  the  dust  return  to  the  earth  as  it  was  :  and 
the  {(ruah)  spirit  (or  their  breath)  shall  return  to  God 
who  gave  it.  Vanity  of  vanities,  saith  the  preacher  ;  all 
is  vanity."  Could  the  preacher  mean  that  a  "  deathless 
spirit"  going  to  God,  was  vanity,  nothingness  ?  No,  but 
when  the  breath  returned  to  God,  as  it  came  from  God, 
a  simple  principle  of  life,  the  man  himself,  and  all  that 
appertained  to  him,  was  notb^ogncss — -a  vapor  that  pass- 
eth  away.  Where  is  the  difference  between  the  expres- 
sion ''  the  spirit  goes  to  God,"  and  "  God  gathers  the 
spirit,"  in  the  preceding  quotation  ?    The  man  himself  in 


110  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

both  cases  ''  returneth  to  his  earth."  Ecc.  8:8,"  There 
is  no  man  hath  power  over  the  (ruah)  spirit,  to  retain, 
the  ruahy  neither  hath  he  power  in  the  day  of  death." 

But  to  close  every  objector's  mouth,  we  find  that  the 
same  writer  who  said  the  spirit  goes  to  God  who  gave 
it,  hkewise  says,  that  there  is  no  difference  between  the 
spirit  of  a  man,  and  the  spirit  of  beasts  ;  and  the  uniform 
testimony  of  Scripture  is,  that  w^hen  God  takes  aw^ay 
this  spirit,  the  whole  man,  with  all  his  rational  powders, 
is  reduced  to  dust,  and  perishes.  We  shall  give  the 
sense  of  Ecc.  3  :  18,  as  best  we  can,  and  let  the  reader 
compare.  "  I  said  in  my  heart  concerning  the  sons  of 
(anosheem)  mortals,  that  God  w^ould  {borah)  search  them, 
and  show^  to  them,  that  they  are  like  the  beasts.  There- 
fore the  death  of  man,  and  the  death  of  beasts  are  alike ; 
and  the  condition  of  them  both  is  equal :  as  man  dieth, 
so  they  also  die :  all  creatures  have  one  [ruah)  spirit ; 
and  man  hath  nothing  more  than  beast :  all  creatures  are 
subject  to  vanity  and  decay,  and  all  go  to  one  place  :  of 
dust  they  w^ere  all  made,  and  into  dust  they  all  return 
together.  Who  knoweth  that  the  (ruah)  spirit,  or 
breath,  of  the  children  of  Adam  ascendeth  ?  and  that 
the  {ruah)  spirit,  or  breath,  of  the  beast  descendeth  to 
the  earth  ?"  The  Hebrew  emphatically  declares  that 
the  ruah  of  men  and  of  beasts  is  the  same  ;  that  they  are 
both  alike ;  that  at  death  they  both  descend  into  the 
earth.  And  Solomon  seems  to  pray  that  God  would 
show  to  men  their  mortal  nature ;  and  challenges  any  of 
them  to  point  out  a  particle  of  difference  in  their  spirit. 
The  translators  have  translated  the  word  ruah,  breathy 
in  the  19th  verse,  and  spirit  in  the  21st  verse.  Was  this 
honest  ? 

Will  the  reader  please  to  note  that  all  creatures  have 
ONE  spirit,  not  each  one  a  separate,  individual  spirit,  or 
ghost.  But  a  man  has  no  pre-eminence  in  death  above 
the  beasts.  But  this  would  not  be  truth,  if  a  man  were 
favored  with  a  conscious  spirit  that  could  survive  his 
body.  The  man,  as  a  whole,  and  the  beasts  alike  return 
to  dust.  This  text  seems  to  be  so  framed  as  to  prevent 
the  possibility  of  evading  its  force.  Eeader,  do  you  be- 
lieve it  ?  The  spirit  of  inspiration  includes  specifically 
ALL  the  parts  of  man,  his  body  and  his  spirit.  Eeader, 
dare  you  except  a  part  from  death  where  God  makes  no 


IS  THE  SPIRIT  OF  MAN  IMMORTAL  ?  Ill 

exw  option  ?  In  the  light  of  this  testimony,  what  becomes 
of  ine  "  deathless  spirit"  ? 

We  now  refer  to  a  few  of  the  simihtudes  that  are  used 
for  spirit^  and  show  their  agreement  with  our  previous 
deductions.  Pro  v.  20  :  27,  "  The  spirit  of  man  is  the 
(nair)  lamp  of  the  Lord,  searching  all  the  inward  parts.'* 
Prov.  13  :  9,  "  The  light  of  the  righteous  rejoiceth  :  but 
the  {nair)  lamp  of  the  wicked  shall  be  ^^ put  out.''^  Pr. 
20 :  20,  "  Whoso  curseth  his  father  or  his  mother,  his 
(nair)  lamp  shall  be  '  put  out''  in  obscure  darkness ^ 
Pr.  24  :  20,  "  There  shall  be  no  reward  to  the  evil  man  ; 
the  {nair)  lamp  of  the  wicked  shall  \)Q  put  out?''  Job 
18  :  5,  '*  Yea,  the  light  of  the  wicked  shall  be  ^ put  out^ 
and  the  spark  of  his  fire  shall  '  not  shine?  "  "  The  light 
shall  be  dark  in  his  tabernacle,  and  his  {nair)  lamp  shall 
be  ^ put  out''  WITH  HIM."  Job  21  :  17,  "  How  oft  is  the 
{nair)  lamp  of  the  wicked  '  put  out''  ?  and  how  oft 
cometh  their  destruction  upon  them?''  Ps.  76  :  12,  "  He 
shall  '  cut  off"'  the  spirit  of  princes."  We  have  transla- 
ted nair^  uniformly,  lamp.  Now  substitute  the  word 
"  spirit^^  as  is  meant,  where  light,  lamp,  and  spark  are 
found ;  and  how  plainly  we  are  taught  that  the  spirit  of 
man  is  unconscious  when  separated  from  him.  It  is 
^'' put  ouV  ;  ^''  put  out  in  obscure  darkness'''' ;  "shall  not 
shine" ;  "  his  [spirit]  shall  be  put  out  with  him?''  Such 
language  can  no  way  be  made  compatible  with  the  sepa- 
rate conscious  existence  of  the  spirit. 

But  there  are  other  strong  jBgurative  expressions  taken 
from  the  identity  of  the  principle  of  life  to  wind.  Ps.  78  : 
39,  "  For  he  remembered  that  they  were  but  flesh ;  a 
{ruah)  wind,  or  spirit,  that  passeth  away,  and  cometh 
720^  again?''  Ps.  103  :  14,  "  Godknoweth  our  frame  ;  he 
remembereth  that  we  are  but  dust.  As  for  man,  his 
days  are  as  grass  :  as  a  flower  of  the  field,  so  he  flourish- 
eth.  For  the  {ruah)  wind  passeth  over  it,  and  it  is 
gone ;  and  the  place  thereof  shall  know  it  no  more." 
Jas.  4  :  14,  "  For  what  is  your  life  ?  It  is  even  a  vapor, 
that  appeareth  for  a  little  time^  and  then  vanisheth 
away?''  Job  7:7,  "  O  remember  that  my  hfe  is  {ruah) 
wind."  Isa.  41 :  23,  29,  The  prophet  addressing  tlie 
idols  calls  upon  them  to  "  Show  the  things  that  are  to 
coifte  hereafter,  that  w^e  may  know  that  ye  are  gods ; 
yea  do  good  or  do  evil  that  we  may  be  dismayed,  and 


112  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

behold  it  together.  Behold  ye  are  worse  than  nothing." 
And  speaking  of  the  men  of  Jerusalem,  he  says  their 
molten  images,  are  ruah^  wind,  and  confusion.  Here 
we  may  see,  that  instead  of  the  {ruah)  spirit,  imparting 
a  principle  of  immortality  to  man,  exactly  the  reverse  is 
the  truth ;  and  because  man  is  dependent  upon  the  (ruah) 
spirit,  for  life,  therefore  is  he  mortal,  and  vanity,  and 
fading  as  a  flower  of  the  field. 

We  hope  that  enough  has  been  said  to  convince  every 
man,  that  man  has  no  spirit  that  can  have  a  separate 
conscious  existence.  We  believe  it  impossible  for  a  can- 
did man  to  review  the  mass  of  evidence  we  have  pro- 
duced, and  not  perceive  the  fallacy  of  the  prevailing  notion 
of  the  separate  conscious  existence  of  the  spirit  of  man. 

Paul  had  taught  that  Christians  are  justified  by  the 
belief  of  a  gospel  which  had  been  preached  unto  Abra- 
ham four  hundred  and  thirty  years  before  the  giving  of 
a  law  of  works  :  "  ex  ergon  nomon^^  should  be  read,  ex 
nomon  ergon  ;  and  that  this  law  of  works  could  not  an- 
nul the  law  of  faith  in  the  gospel,  or  law  of  liberty.  By 
what  law  are  we  justified  ?  By  a  law  "  of  works"  ? 
"  Nay;  but  by  the  law  of  faith.  Therefore  we  conclude 
that  a  man  is  justified"  by  (obedience  to  a  law  of  liberty, 
or  royal  law,  or  what  Paul  calls  a  law  of)  faith,  apart 
from,  (or  without)  a  law  of  works."  This  doctrine  had 
been  misunderstood  and  been  perverted,  and  made  to 
mean  that  men  were  justified  without  obedience.  But 
in  James  2:17,  26,  the  apostle  argues,  that  faith  and 
works  united  were  indispensably  necessary  to  constitute 
that  active  faith,  by  which  the  justified  shall  have  life. 
That  either  one  without  the  other  is  dead.  As  it  is  of 
no  use  to  say,  we  wish  well  to  men,  and  yet  are  unwill- 
ing to  assist  them  ;  "  Even  so  faith,  if  it  hath  not  works, 
is  dead,  being  by  itself."  And  he  closes  his  argument 
by  this  simile  :  "  For  as  the  body  without  the  (pneuma) 
spirit  J  is  dead ;  so  faith  without  works  is  dead  also." 
That  is,  that  as  the  union  of  body  and  spirit ,  was  indis- 
pensably necessary  to  constitute  man  a  living  being,  so 
tho.  union  of  faith  and  works  was  likewise  necessary  to 
constitute  a  living  faith,  or  that  faith  to  which  the  pro- 
mise of  life  was  attached.  Now  if  we  could  in  truth  say, 
that  the  spirit  can  live  apart  from  the  body,  we  should 
overturn  the  masterly  argument  of  the  apostle,  and  make 


THE  MIND  NOT  IMMORTAL.  113 

him  affirm  that  wcn'ks  disunited  from  faith^  would  entitle 
man  to  justification  and  life.  So  we  argue,  That  as  the 
body  without  the  spirit  is  dead  ;  so  the  spirit  without 
the  body  is  dead  also. 

IS  THE  MIND  IMMORTAL  ? 

Can  the  mind  exercise  its  powers  separately  from  the 
body,  or  man  ?  Or,  are  the  dead  unconscious  ?  We 
have  shown  that  spirit  sometimes  means  the  mind.  Al- 
though the  words  mind  and  spirit,  may  not  occur  in  the 
following  passages,  yet  they  plainly  teach,  that  the  opera- 
tion of  the  spirit,  of  the  mind,  or  of  the  rational  powers, 
become  entirely  extinct  in  death  ;  and  that  the  separated 
spirit  or  principle  of  life,  is  utterly  incapable,  of  mental 
action,  of  knowledge,  or  of  consciousness  ;  and  that  the 
whole  man  with  all  his  powers  of  knowledge,  and  con- 
sciousness, is  inoperative,  is  entirely  devoid  of  thought 
and  feeling ;  and  that  the  whole  man  is  in  the  (keve^-) 
grave,  or  in  {sheol,  equal  to  the  Greek  hadeSj)  the  state 
of  death.  That  is,  some  of  the  dead  are  in  the  kever  ; 
but  all  the  dead  are  in  sheol.  Consequently  the  mind 
and  spirit  have  no  separate  conscious  existence.  But  to 
the  proof.  In  Ecc.  9  :  10,  "  Whatsoever  thy  hand  find- 
eth  to  do,  do  it  with  thy  might ;  for  there  is  no  work^  nor 
device^  nor  knowledge^  nor  wisdom^  in  sheol ^  the  state  of 
the  dead,  ivhither  thou  goest^  We  quote  this  passage 
because  it  teaches  that  all  men  go  to  sheol^  and  that 
there  is  no  knowledge  there.  A  full  description  of  sheol 
is  reserved  till  we  examine  the  hell  of  the  Scriptures. 

We  will  examine  David's  testimony.  He  says,  Psa. 
119:  175,  "Let  my  soul  live  ^  audit  &\i2i)L\  praise  thee." 
Why  David  ?  Cannot  your  soul  praise  God  when  sepa- 
rated from  the  body,  and  you  are  dead  and  buried  ?  We 
will  let  David  answer.  Ps.  115:  \7 ^  ^'' Thii  dead  praise 
not  the  Lord^  neither  any  that  go  down  into  silenced 
And  again  ;  Ps.  6:4,"  O  Lord,  deliver  my  souP^  (from 
sickness).  "  For  in  death  there  is  7io  remembrance  oj 
thee :  in  sheol,  (the  grave,  or  state  of  death)  who  shall 
give  thee  thanks  ?^^  We  give  the  Hebrew  and  Greek 
words  translated  ^ra^c,  pit,  and  hell,  that  the  reader  may 
perceive  the  sense  in  which  they  are  used.  Where  the 
word  soul  occurs,  if  we  do  not  give  the  original  word,  it 


114  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION, 

is  in  every  case  in  Hebrew,  nephesh^  and  in  Greek, 
psuche. 

We  will  give  an  analysis  of  the  88th  Psalm,  extracting 
such  parts  as  are  applicable  to  our  purpose  :  "  0  Lord 
God  of  my  salvation  ....  incline  thine  ear  unto  my  cry  ; 
for  my  {nephesh^)  soul^  is  full  of  troubles  ;  and  my  life 
draweth  nigh  unto  the  {kever^)  grave.  I  am  [already] 
(esteemed  as  one  of)  them  that  go  down  into  the  pit  : 
1  am  as  a  man  that  hath  no  strength  :  free  among  the 
deacl^  like  the  slain  that  he  in  the  {kever^)  grave^  whom 
thou  reviemherest  no  more  :  and  they  are   cut  off  from 

thy  hand Lord,  I  have  called  daily  upon  thee  .  .  . 

Wilt  thou  show  wonders  to  the  dead  ?  Shall  the  dead 
arise  and  praise  thee  !  Shall  thy  loving-kindness  be 
declared  in  the  (kever)  grave  ?  or  thy  faithfulness  (ava- 
doun^j  in  a  place  of  destruction  ?  Shall  thy  wonders  be 
known  in  the  dark  ?  and  thy  righteousness  in  the  land 
of  forgetfulness  .?"  David  evidently  expected  that  he 
himself,  his  soul,  would  go  into  the  grave,  and  that  when 
there,  he  would  be  cut  off  from  the  hand,  and  the 
remembrance  of  God,  that  the  grave  was  a  place  of 
darkness,  of  forgetfulness,  of  destruction  ;  and  by  a 
series  of  emphatic  questions,  he  declares  that  there  is  no 
knowledge,  or  consciousness  there,  and  the  dead  praise 
not  the  Lord.  In  Ps.  30  :  2-9,  David  speaks  to  the 
same  effect.  But  here,  lest  they  should  spoil  their 
Pagan  traditions,  the  translators  have  rendered  sheol^ 
which  means  the  state  of  death^  by  grave^  and  shokhath, 
destruction^  by  pit.  But  we  shall  endeavor  to  correct 
their  translation,  even  though  our  correction  should  un- 
cover a  dead  soul.  Remember,  David  is  praising  God, 
whose  "  favor  is  life,"  for  having  dehvered  him  from 
death.  ^'  O  Lord,  my  God,  I  cried  unto  thee,  and  thou 
hast  healed  me.  O  Lord  thou  hast  brought  up  my 
(nephesh^)  soul,  from  (sheol,)  death  ;  thou  hast  kept  me 

alive,  that  I  should  not  go  down  to  the  (hour,)  pit 

I  cried  to  thee,  O  Lord  ....  What  profit  is  there  in  my 
blood,  when  /  go  down  to  {shokhatk,)  destruction  ? 
Shall  the  dust  praise  thee  ?  shall  it  declare  thy  truth  ? 
....  Thou  hast  turned  for  me  my  mourning  into  dancing; 
to  the  end  that  my  glory  (or  tongue)  may  sing  praise  to 
thee,  and  not  be  silent."  Here  David  uses  interchange- 
ably his  soul  and  himself,   and  expected  that  himself 


THE  MIND  NOT  IMMORTAL.  115 

would  go  to  destruction,  and  become  dust;  and  con- 
trasts his  state  when  dead  to  his  state  while  living. 
While  living  he  could  praise  God  ;  but  when  dead,  he 
significantly  asks,  Can  dust  praise  God  ?  Say  you  ; 
Surely  the  soul  of  David  could  not  die  !  Hear  him 
speaking,  then,  in  the  person  of  a  greater  than  himself, 
m  the  16th  Psalm,  "  Because  the  (Lord)  is  at  my  right 
hand,  I  shall  not  be  moved.  Therefore  my  heart  is  glad, 
and  my  glory  rejoiceth  :  vay  flesh  also  shall  rest  in  hope. 
For  thou  wilt  not  leave  my  (nephesh^)  soul^  in  [sheol^)  the 
state  of  death  ;  neither  wilt  thou  suffer  thy  Holy  One 
to  see  corruption,  [But]  thou  wilt  show  me  the  path  of 
life."  David  strongly  expresses  the  entire  extinction  of 
the  whole  being  of  man,  including  the  operations  of  his 
mind,  in  Ps.  146  :  3,  ^'  Put  not  your  trust  in  princes,  nor 
in  the  son  of  (odom^)  a  man  of  earth,  in  whom  there  is 
no  help.  His  breath  goeth  forth,  he  returneth  to  his 
earthy  in  that  very  day  his  thotj gkts  perish.'*^ 

But  we  will  take  the  testimony  of  Peter  and  Paul, 
and  ascertain  whether  David  was  justified  in  his  opinions 
regarding  his  soul  returning  to  dust  again,  and  himself 
ceasing  to  be  conscious.  Acts  2  :  29,  "  Men  and 
brethren,  let  me  freely  speak  unto  you  of  the  patriarch 
David,  that  he  is  both  dead  and  buried^  and  his  sepul- 
chre is  with  us  unto  this  day."  34  v.  "  For  David  is 
not  ascended  into  the  heavens."  13  :  36,  "For  David, 
after  he  had  served  his  own  generation  by  the  will  of 
God,  fell  on  sleep  and  was  laid  to  his  fathers,  and  saw 
corruption "  Yea  ;  his  soul  has  been  left  in  [sheol- 
kades^)  the  state  af  deaths  and  has  seen  corruption^  and 
therefore  he  can  no  longer  praise  God,  till  he  awakes  in 
the  likeness  of  the  Savior,  and  his  "  corruption  puts  on 
incorruption,"  and  ''  when  Christ  who  is  our  life^  shall 
appear,  (in  the  clouds  of  heaven,)  then  shall  he  also  ap- 
pear in  glory  with  him."  Col.  3  :  4.  Well  might  David 
exclaim,  Ps.  119  :  175,  "  Let  my  soul  live,  and  it  shall 
praise  thee."  For  prophesying  of  death  he  says,  Ps.  22  : 
15,  ''  Thou  hast  brought  me  into  the  dust  of  death.'''' 
Again,  Ps.  31  ;  17,  "  Let  the  wicked  be  silent  in  sheol?'' 
Or,  interpreting  this  language  prophetically,  "  The 
wicked  shall  be  silent  in  (sheol^  death.''''  David's  testi- 
mony, on  other  points,  will  be  found  in  its  appropriate 
place. 


116  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

Solomon  says,  Ecc.  9,  "  There  is  one  event  to  the 
righteous,  and  to  the  wicked.. ..To  him  that  is  joined  to 
all  the  living  there  is  hope  :  for  a  living  dog  is  better 
than  a  dead  liony  [Why,  Solomon,  is  the  most  insigni- 
ficant creature  while  alive,  better  than  the  most  noble 
creature,  including  man,  when  he  is  dead  ?]  "  For  the 
living  knoiv  that  they  shall  die :  but  the  dead  knoio  not 
anything^  neither  have  they,"  [mark,  I  speak  of  present 
time,  while  they  remain  dead,  neither  have  they]  any 
more  a  reward ;  for  the  {zaikher)  memorial  of  them  is 
forgotten.  Also  their  love^  and  their  hatred ^  and  their 
envy^  is  noio  perished;  neither  have  they  any  more 
(khailek)  a  part  (le-oulom)  during  the  whole  period  of 
theif  death,  in  any  [work]  that  is  done  under  the  sun.... 
Live  joyfully  [therefore]  with  the  wife  whom  thou  lovest 
all  the  days  of  the  life  of  thy  vanity,  which  he  hath  given 
thee  under  the  sun  ;  all  the  days  [I  say]  of  thy  vanity  : 
[for  the  period  of  thy  conscious  existence  in  the  present 
state  of  things,  or  things  under  this  sun,  is  but  a  shadow, 
and  is  quickly  passing  away  :]  for  that  is  thy  portion  in 
this  life^  and  in  thy  labor  which  thou  takest  under  the 
sun.  [And  because  Hfe,  or  this  life,  or  while  you  are 
living,  is  the  only  period  of  knowledge,  enjoyment,  or  la- 
bor ;  or,  as  I  said  before,  of  love,  of  hatred,  and  of  envy, 
till  the  final  consummation  ;  or,  until  you  are  raised  again 
to  life ;  therefore]  Whatsoever  thy  hand  findeth  to  do, 
do  it  with  {kouakh)  energy ;  for  there  is  no  work,  nor 
device,  nor  knowledge,  nor  wisdom,  in  (sheol)  the  state 
of  the  dead,  whither  thou  goe.-t." 

The  whole  passage  is  sufficiently  strong  without  our 
interlineations  in  brackets.  They  are  added,  not  to  make 
assurance  doubly  sure  ;  but  to  call  attention  to  the  argu- 
ment of  the  preacher,  and  because  the  vindicators  of  Pa- 
gan traditions  are  galled  under  this  plainly  spoken  lan- 
guage ;  for  an  attempt  has  been  made  by  those  "  who 
receive  not  the  love  of  the  truth,"  to  wrest  this  whole 
passage  from  its  most  obvious  import.  First,  they  deny 
that  Solomon  had  any  reference  to  the  state  of  the  dead, 
as  dead  me?ij  and  in  sheol ;  and  they  falsely  assume  that 
he  meant  only  to  state,  that  the  bodies  of  the  dead  in  the 
grave,  have  no  connection  with  earthly  things,  and  have 
DO  knowledge  there  !  !  And  that  he  does  not  here,  and 
in  chapter  3:  17-21,  teach  that  there  are  no  conscious 


THE  MIND  NOT  IMMORTAL.  117 

"  disembodied  spirits,"  and  that  we  may  not  infer  that 
the  poetical  "  spirit  land,"  exists  only  in  the  imagination ; 
and  therefore  that  the  dogma  of  the  separate  existence 
of  conscious  spirits,  is  no  way  affected  by  Solomon's  de- 
clarations ! !  And  secondly,  they  charge  Solomon  with 
ignorance,  and  infidelity,  respecting  the  state  of  the  dead, 
and  the  future  resurrection  ! ! 

To  the  first  objection  we  reply,  that  in  the  very  place 
"  whither  thou  goest^''^  be  it  where  it  may,  but  which 
Solomon  affirms  to  be  "  sheol^'^  there  is  no  knowledge^  nor 
device;  and  that  the  dead — wherever  they  be — ^^  know 
not  anything?^  Moreover,  if  there  be  a  ''  spirit  land," 
where  the  disembodied  spirits  of  men  are  conscious ; 
then  are  Solomon,  David,  Isaiah,  Job,  Peter,  and  Paul, 
found  false  witnesses  before  God ;  for  they  all  plainly 
testify  to  the  unconsciousness  of  the  dead.  To  the  se- 
cond objection,  the  charge  preferred  against  Solomon  of 
ignorance  and  infidelity,  we  reply  that  it  comes  with  a 
bad  grace  from  those  who  quote  Solomon  as  their  best 
authority^  as  teaching,  as  they  aver  in  Ecc.  12  :  7,  the 
separate  conscious  existence  of  the  spirit  of  man.  We 
aflftrm  that  it  is  no  reproach  to  the  wisdom  of  Solomon 
to  be  ignorant  of  a  Pagan  fable  that  did  not  become  pre- 
valent in  the  world,  until  five  hundred  years  after  his 
death.  The  charge  of  infidelity  against  Solomon,  we 
cannot  help  suspecting,  is  founded  principally,  in  a  desire 
to  set  aside  his  authority,  and  with  the  desire  of  support- 
ing popular  tradition.  It  derives  some  little  apparent 
plausibility  from  an  attempted  change  of  the  present^  in- 
to the  future  time :  making  the  phrase  "  neither  have 
they,"  in  the  5th  and  again  in  the  6th  verse,  to  read 
"  neither  shall  they  have'''  ;  and  disi'egarding  the  present 
time  of  the  6th  verse,  "  is  ^^o^d;  perished."  Again  in  dis- 
regarding the  idiom  of  the  preacher,  in  the  phrase,  "  un- 
der the  sun,"  which  he  makes  equivalent  to  the  present 
state  of  things.  And  still  again,  from  the  obviously 
wrong  translation  of  the  word  02^/o/7i,  rendered  "for  ever," 
in  verse  6th.  The  Hebrew  word  oulom.^  is  equal  to  the 
Greek  word  aion^  and  both  refer  to  an  age,  or  hmited 
period  of  time  ;  and  when  modified,  or  used  as  adverbs, 
or  adjectives,  they  embrace  the  whole  of  the  period  re- 
ferred to  in  the  context.  But  when  these  words  refer  to 
a  thing  in  the  abstract,  that  is  not  necessarily  limited ; 


118  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

they  then  imply  duration  as  long  as  that  thing  shall  ex- 
ist.  For  instance,  when  Jonah  is  made  to  say,  *'  The 
earth  with  her  bars  was  about  me  for  ever''^ ;  it  means 
the  whole  of  the  period  that  Jonah  was  in  the  whale ; 
but  that  period  is  limited  to  three  days  and  three  nights. 
So  when  Paul  is  made  to  say,  tr.,  Philemon,  15th  verse. 
'  For  perhaps  he  therefore  departed  for  a  seaso?iy  that 
thou  shouldst  receive  him /or  ever^^^  (aionion)  ;  it  refers 
to  the  whole  period  that  he  was  capable  of  service ;  that 
is,  for  life;  which  period  is  contrasted  with  "  season." 
So  these  words  when  applied  to  life,  or  destruction,  in 
the  abstract,  as  these  are  capable  of  endurance,  and  there 
is  no  other  reference  to  a  period,  then  do  they  imply 
that  the  state  will  be  everlasting,  in  the  English  unlimit- 
ed sense  of  the  term.  Now  then  for  the  application.  If 
Solomon  had  applied  the  term  oulom  to  death,  or  to 
sheol — these  terms  not  being  limited  in  the  context — 
then  should  the  word  oulom  be  translated  for  ever,  or 
everlasting ;  and  Solomon  would  have  been  in  direct  op- 
position to  Isa.  25:8;  Hos.  13:  14;  Mat.  16  :  18  ;  1 
Cor.  15  :  54,  55 ;  and  Eev.  20  :  14 ;  and  would  have  as- 
serted that  death,  and  sheol,  could  never  be  destroyed — 
and  therefore  there  would  be  no  resurrection.  But  as 
Solomon  refers  to  a  period  of  time  necessarily  limited  to 
the  period  while  men  have  their  portion  in  things  'under 
the  sun,'  so  the  word  oulom,  means  during  the  whole  of 
that  period,  and  7io  more.  Further  remarks  on  these 
words  will  be  found  in  the  subsequent  pages.  After 
this,  let  there  be  no  cavilling,  nor  evasion.  Solomon  de- 
clares that  dead  men  have  no  knowledge — that  the  results 
of  life  and  r)iind  have  become  extinct  with  the  man — 
that  they  have  perished.  The  dead  are  opposed  to  the 
living,  and  whatever  part  of  man  lived  and  exercised  the 
faculties  of  knowledge,  and  emotion,  it  is  that  part  espe- 
cially that  has  ceased  to  know  or  feel.  And  ceased  to 
know  and  feel,  in  that  very  state  in  which  it  noio  may 
be.  And  now  the  captious  objector  may  call  that  once 
knowing  part,  either  body,  mind,  or  spirit,  it  will  avail 
him  nought. 

More  testimony  concerning  the  unconsciousness  of  the 
dead.     Job  14th  chapter. 


THE  MIND  NOT  IMMORTAL. 

19.  "  The  waters  wear  away  the  stones,  ^^JT^' 
The  dust  of  the  earth  inundates  her  produce,  ^^*^ 
And  the  hope  of  (enoush)  mortal  mail  thou  consumest. 

20.  Thou  prevailest  against  him  (le-oulmn)  continually,  and  he 

must  pass  away  ; 
Thou  wearest  out  his  frame  :  and  wilt  send  him  away. 

21.  His  sons  may  come  to  honor,  but  he  will  not  know  it, 
And  they  may  be  reduced,  but  he  will  not  discern  them. 

22.  His  flesh  shall  drop  from  off  him, 

And  his  soul  shall  become  a  waste  from  him." 

Isa.  63  :  18,  "  Doubtless  thou  art  our  father,  though 
Abraham  be  ignorant  of  us,  and  Israel  acknoivledge  us 
noty  Luke  10:  23,  Jesus  said,  "Blessed  are  the  eyes 
which  see  the  things  that  ye  see  :  for  I  tell  you,  that 
many  prophets  and  kings  have  desired  to  see  those  things 
which  ye  see,  and  have  not  seen  them  ;  and  to  hear  those 
things  which  ye  hear,  and  have  not  heard  themy  Luke 
2  :  26,  "  It  was  revealed  unto  Simeon  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  that  he  should  not  see  death,  until  he  should  see 
the  Messiah  of  the  Lord."  28  ver.  "  Then  he  took  (the 
child  Jesus)  in  his  arms,  and  blessed  God,  and  said :  My 
Lord,  now  release  thy  servant  in  peace,  as  thou  hast 
said;  for  lo,  my  eyes  have  seen  thy  mercy." 

We  have  here  the  testimony  of  Job,  Isaiah,  and  Jesus 
Christ,  that  the  dead  have  no  knowledge  of  what  is 
passing  upon  the  earth  ;  yea,  they  are  ignorant  of  the 
most  glorious  events  passing  here,  relative  to  their  own 
redemption,  much  as  they  desired  to  see  them  ;  they 
were  necessarily  precluded  from  the  enjoyment  of  this 
desire,  by  their  death  prior  to  the  manifestation  of  the 
Son  of  God.  But  the  life-time  of  Simeon  was  protracted 
by  special  favor,  that  he  might  enjoy  that  desirable 
privilege  ;  and,  having  enjoyed  it,  he  was  ready  to  be 
released  from  life,  knowing  that  he  should  be  "  born 
again,"  from  among  the  dead  ones  into  the  kingdom, 
when  the  Messiah  should  appear  the  second  time  with- 
out a  sin-offering  to  raise  to  life  (eternal)  all  those  that 
are  anxiously  expecting  him.  Luke  20  :  35  ;  Heb.  9  : 
28  ;  Col.  ,3  :  4,  He  knew  that  "  when  Christ  who  is  our 
life,  SHALL  APPEAR,  (iu  the  clouds  of  heaven,)  then  should 
he  also  appear  with  him  in  glory."  Luke  20  :  35  ; 
Heb.  9  :  28  /  Col.  3:4. 

If  any  part  of  Moses  survived  him,  why  could  not 


120  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

that  surviving  part  have  seen  the  l^nd  of  Canaan  after 
he  was  dead,  and  thus  have  precluded  the  necessity 
of  his  going  into  a  high  mountain  during  his  Hfe-time, 
that  he  might  be  favored  with  this  view  ?  Deut.  32 :  48  ; 
34  :  1. 

As  the  Bible  doctrine  of  the  unconsciousness  of  the 
dead,  has  become  very  important,  in  these  latter  days  of 
"  new  revelations"  and  "  spiritual  manifestations"  of 
that  wicked  one,  "  whose  coming  is  after  the  working 
of  Satan,  with  all  power,  and  signs,  and  lying  wonders, 
and  with  all  deceivableness  of  unrighteousness  in  them 
that  perish  ;  because  they  receive  not  the  love  of  the 
truth,  that  they  might  be  saved  ;"  2  Thes.  2  :  9; — we 
shall  bring  forward  more  witnesses. 

We  now  produce  the  testimony  of  the  Lord  ;  and  we 
do  most  earnestly  pray  that  the  reader  will  give  it  a 
fcivorable  hearing,  Isaiah,  the  prophet,  is  sent  unto 
liezekiah,  and  said  :  38  c.  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  set 
thy  house  in  order ;  for  thou  shalt  die,  and  not  live  .... 
Then  liezekiah  prayed  unto  the  Lord ....  Thus  saith 
the  Lord^  I  have  heard  thy  prayer  ;  .  .  .  .  behold,  I  will 
add  unto  thy  days  fifteen  years^  This  is  the  writing 
of  Hezekiah,  when  he  was  recovered  of  his  sickness ; 
"  I  said  in  the  cutting  off  of  my  days,  /  shall  go  to  the 
gates,  (or  be  under  the  power)  of  the  grave  :  /  am  de- 
prived of  the  residue  of  my  years.  I  said,  I  shall  not  see 
the  Lord,  even  the  Lord,  in  the  land  of  the  living  :  1 
shall  behold  man  no  more,  with  the  inhabitants  of  the 

world."  (But)  "  What  shall  I  say  ? 0  Lord, 

thou  hast,  in  love  to  my  soul^  delivered  it  from  the  pit  of 

corrujjtion For   the  grave  cannot  praise  thee  : 

death  cannot  celebrate  thee  :  they  that  go  down  into  the 
pit,  cannot  hope  for  thy  truth.  The  living,  the  living, 
he  shall  praise  thee,  as  I  do  this  day."  Isa.  38. 

As  the  Lord's  message  is  expressed  affirmatively— 
^'  tlwu  shalt  die  ,•"  and  negatively,  *'  and  not  live  /"  it  - 
utterly  precludes  the  possibility,  that  had  Hezekiah 
died,  he  would  have  lived  in  heaven,  or  elsewhere.  But 
^^ fifteen  years]''  were  added  to  his  life.  Can  fifteen  years 
be  added  to  the  life  of  an  immortal  soul  ?  Can  it  be 
deprived  of  the  residue  of  its  life  ?  Nay ;  verily.  Plad 
he  died,  ^  he  would  not  have  seen  the  Lord,"  neither 
would  he  have  seen  man,  or  the  souls  of  men,  any  more, 


SOUL  DOES  NOT  SURVIVE  MAN.  121 

in  this  world,  or  in  any  other.  For  this  is  emphatically, 
^'  the  land  of  the  living,"  which  could  not  be  the  case,  i'* 
his  sold  lived  in  another  state  of  being.  But  further ,' 
his  soul  was  dehvered  from  the  grave,  where  it,  (the 
soul,)  would  have  experienced  '^  corruption,"  but  for 
such  deliverance  :  for  he  says  the  dead  cannot  praise 
God,  nor  hope  for  his  truth.  Surely,  this  testimony 
needs  no  confirmation.  When  we  reflect,  that  the 
prophets  ^nd  apostles,  unversed  in  Pagan  traditions, 
would  have  deemed  it  a  work  of  supererogation,  for- 
mally to  attempt  to  prove  that  a  dead  man  is  a  dead 
man^  and  that  they  have  alluded  to  the  self-evidert  fact 
only  incidentally,  in  contrast  with  hfe,  and  to  ur^^  us  to 
*^  work  while  the  day  lasts,  for  the  night  come^>  when 
no  man  can  ivork  ,•"  we  are  astonished  at  the  nass  of 
evidence  we  have  been  able  to  collect 

isro  CONSCIOUS  spirit,  or  soul,  survives  the  d     ni  op 

MAN. 

Under  ttiis  head  we  shall  arrange  a  few  mit?  .ellaneous 
proofs ;  and,  though  no  soul,  or  spirit,  or  the  operations 
of  life,  or  mind,  be  specifically  named  in  thsm  ^  yet  they 
will  prove  that  the  whole  man,  as  a  unit,  becomes  un- 
conscious in  death ;  and  they  are  utterly  irreconcilable 
with  the  dogma  of  the  separate  conscious  existence  of 
the  spirit.  We  pass  over,  for  the  present,  those  nu- 
merous texts  that  speak  of  the  utter  extermination  of 
the  being  of  the  wicked,  as  properly  belonging  to 
mother  part  of  our  subject,  excepting  where  they  eluci- 
late  the  argument  before  us. 

Josh.  1:1,"  The  Lord  spake  unto  Joshua  .  . .  saying, 
IdLoses,  my  servant,  is  deadP  Deut.  32  :  48,  "  And  the 
Lord  spake  unto  Moses  ....  saying,  get  thee  up  into 
ihis  mountain  Abarim,  unto  mount  Nebo  .  ,  .  .  and  be- 
hold the  land  of  Canaan,  ....  and  die  in  the  mount,  .  .  . 
and  be  gathered  unto  thy  people."  34 :  1,  ''  And 
Moses  went  up  .  ,  .  .  And  the  Lord  showed  him  all  the 

land And  the  Lord  said  ....  I  have  caused  thee 

to  see  it  with  thine  eyes,  but  thou  shalt  not  go  over 
thither.  So  Moses,  the  servant  of  the  Lord,  died  there^ 
in  the  land  of  Moab,  according  to  the  word  of  the  Lord. 
And  he  buried  him  in  a  valley,  in   the  land   of  Moab, 


122  BIBLE   VS,    TRADITION. 

over  against  Beth-peor  :  but  no  man  knoweth  of  liis 
sepulchre  unto  this  day.  And  Moses  was  a  hundred 
and  twenty  years  old  when  he  diedy  To  affirm  that 
the  essential  part  of  Moses,  the  conscious  and  rational 
principle,  the  intelligent  spirit  of  Moses^  continued  to 
live,  is  to  deny  the  veracity  of  God  !  For  if  only  the 
body  died,  leaving  a  living,  conscious  ghost,  then  evi- 
dently Moses  himself  did  not  die  I  and  the  prediction 
of  God  failed,  and  the  account  is  not  a  true  record  of 
the  transaction.  The  reader  need  not  refer  to  Jude  9  : 
nor  Luke  9  :  30  ;  we  shall  &how  in  their  place,  that  they 
have  no  reference  to  the  transaction  recorded  above. 
The  record  says,  Moses  died. 

Job  14 :  10,  "  But  {gever^)  the  strong  man,  {kholash^) 
is  weakened  and  dieth  :  yea^  {odom^  the  man  of  earth,, 
{govaj)  is  wasted  away ;  and  where  is  he  ?"  [As]  '*  The 
waters  have  failed  from  the  lake,  and  the  flood  is  ex- 
hausted and  dried  up  :  [so]  {eesh)  the  virtuous  man 
lieth  down,  and  riseth  not  again  ;  till  the  heavens  be 
dissolved,  they  shall  not  awake,  nor  be  (oor,)  aroused 
out  of  their  sleep." 

A  few  remarks  upon  the  King's  "  most  excellent"  (?) 
translation,  to  which  the  reader  is  referred.  There  are 
three  words/  in  our  quotation,  each  having  a  distinct 
meaning,  which  are  all  rendered  by  the  single  term 
"  man  ;"  and  the  beautiful  antithesis  of  the  original, 
between  strength  and  weakness,  is  disregarded,  and 
likewise  the  correspondence  between  a  man  of  earth, 
and  the  wasting  again  to  earth,  is  entirely  obliterated  ia 
the  common  version  ;  because^  perhaps^  it  teaches  the 
dissolution  of  the  man  himself,  and  the  necessary  cessa- 
tion of  his  consciousness  ;  and  then  out  of  the  word 
govUy  "  to  waste  away,"  the  translators  have  shamefully 
manufactured  the  phrase,  "  giveth  up  the  ghost,,"  which 
now  conveys  an  essentially  opposite  idea.  The  idea  of 
the  original  is,  that  the  man,  composed  of  frail  materials^ 
is  dissolved  in  death  ;  but  the  idea  conveyed  by  the 
translation  is*  at  least  in  the  estimation  of  many,  that 
the  essential  man,  as  a  living  ghost,  or  spirit,  having  a 
distinct  and  conscious  being,  has  only  been  separated 
from  a  useless  incumbrance  of  earth,  sometimes  called  a 
"  body,"  and  is  rejoicing  in  a  more  exalted  living  exist* 
ence  !     Yet  this  is  the  translation  which  is  so  lauded  to 


SOUL  DOES  NOT  SURVIVE  MAN.  123 

the  skies,  and  palmed  upon  the  unlearned  as  an  authori- 
tative standard  !  Why  are  these  manifest  perversions 
of  the  word  of  God  permitted  to  continue  ?  Is  learned 
sectarianism  conscious  that  the  original  Scriptures,  in 
their  purity,  cannot  be  made  to  countenance  any  one  of 
their  contradictory  creeds  ?  If  they  really  love  truth, 
let  them  hasten  to  wipe  away  this  reproach,  by  giving 
us  the  very  best  translation,  conveying  the  very  spirit  of 
the  original^  which  the  present  advanced  state  of  know- 
ledge, enables  them  to  give.  We  have  inserted  the 
word  "  lake"  for  "  sea,"  because  the  Hebrews  were 
accustomed  to  call  inland  lakes,  seas,  and  so,  perhaps, 
Job  ;  the  change  agrees  better  with  the  context. 

Job  asks  the  question,  when  a  man  is  dead,  "  Where 
is  he  ?"  And  he  answers  it,  by  implying,  that  he  no 
more  exists,  as  a  man,  than  the  flood,  evaporated  by 
the  sun,  exists  as  a  flood  ;  he  is  sleeping  unconsciously 
in  ^'  the  dust  of  death,"  till  a  change  shall  take  place  in 
the  heavens  and  the  earth,  w^hen  he  shall  suddenly  start 
up  at  the  sound  of  the  trumpet  of  the  *  Prince  of 
angels,'  {archaggelon.)  Again,  10:  18,  ^*  Why  didst 
thou  bring  me  forth  from  the  womb  ?  I  might  (gova^) 
have  wasted  away,  and  no  eye  have  seen  me.  I  might 
have  been,  as  though  I  had  never  existed  ;  have  been 
carried  from  the  womb  to  the  grave."  Gova  is  here 
translated  '^  giveth  up  the  ghost."  But  Job  is  very 
explicit,  and  declares  of  the  state  between  death  and 
the  resurrection,  that  it  is  a  state  of  non-existence,  as 
animated  beings,  in  any  way  whatever.  7  :  21,  *'  Since 
now  I  am  about  to  repose  in  the  dust,  and  thou  shalt 
seek  me^  but  *  J'  shall  not  exist."  Even  God  cannot 
And  Job,  when  he  is  dead  !  But,  surely,  God  could 
have  found  his  hving  ghost,  if  he  had  had  one.  This 
language  is  very  plain  ;  Job  does  not  exist,  and  so  God 
cannot  find  him^  till  he  raises  him  again. 

Jer.  15:  1,  "  Then  said  the  Lord  unto  me,  Though 
Moses  and  Samuel  stood  before  me,  yet  my  mind  could 
not  be  toward  this  people."  Moses  and  Samuel  stood 
before  the  Lord  while  they  were  upon  the  earth ;  but 
they  do  not  stand  before  him  now ;  therefore  we  con- 
clude that  Moses  and  Samuel  are  not  now  alive  in  any 
place.  Ez.  22  :  30,  '*  I  sought  for  a  man  among  them, 
that  should  make  up  the  hedge,  and  stand  in  the  gap  be- 


124  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

fore  me  for  the  land,  that  I  should  not  destroy  it :  but  I 
found  none."  Where  then  are  Moses,  and  Daniel,  and 
Job,  if  God  cannot  find  them  ?  Ah,  says  Job,  "  Thou 
shalt  seek  me,  but  I  shall  not  exist." 

Ps.  90 :  3,  "  Thou  (shoov)  nE-turnest  {enoush)  mortal 
man  to  (dako)  to  his  original  dust  again ;  and  sayest, 
(shoov),  ^etuvUy  ye  {benai  adam)  children  of  the  ground." 
Dako^  means  reduced,  analized,  broken  in  pieces.  How 
strangely  ignorant  were  all  the  prophets  of  the  survivance 
of  the  conscious  spirit !  !  !  Let  us  turn  then  to  the  apos- 
tles :  surely  they  know  something  about  the  state  of 
man  between  death  and  the  resurrection  !  !  But  what  is 
this  we  find  in  the  New  Testament  ?  Christ  and  the 
apostles,  uniformly,  without  a  single  exception,  point 
forward  to  a  specific  period  as  the  time  when  the  saints 
shall  be  rewarded.  They  point  to  a  second  appearing  of 
Christ,  when  he  shall  personally  come  in  the  clouds  of 
heaven  ;  to  a  resurrection  out  from  among  the  dead  ones. 
2  Tim  4  :  7,  ''  I  have  kept  the  faith :  hencelbrth  there  is 
laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of  righteousness,  which  the  Lord, 
the  righteous  judge,  shall  give  me  at  that  day :  and  not  to 
me  only,  but  unto  all  them  that  love  his  appearing."  Mat. 
19  :  28,  "  Verily  I  say  to  you,  that  you  who  have  follow- 
ed me,  w^hen  the  Son  of  Man  shall  sit  on  the  throne  of 
his  glory  in  the  renewed  age,  (regeneration,)  ye  also  shall 
eit  on  twelve  seats,  ruling  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel." 
"  When  he  shall  appear^  we  shall  be  like  him." 

Of  the  patriarchs,  it  is  said,  Heb.  11  :  13,  "  All  these 
died  in  faith,  not  having  received  the  promises."  1  Thes. 
4:  15,  That  the  saints  that  are  dead,  shall  but  just  pre- 
cede those  that  happen  to  be  hving  when  Christ  comes. 
John  3  :  13,  "  No  man  hath  ascended  up  to  heaven,  but 
he  that  came  down  from  heaven,  even  the  Son  of  man." 
The  clause,  "  who  is  in  heaven,"  is  not  in  the  most  ancient 
MSS.,  and  is  probably  the  production  of  some  officious 
transcriber.  Will  the  reader  read  carefully  the  whole  of 
1  Cor.  15:  16,  17.  "If  the  dead  rise  not^  a/irHf  Christ 
be  not  raised  [from  the  dead :]  ye  are  yet  in  your  sins." 
That  is,  if  ye  are  not  raised  again  from  a  state  of  nothing- 
ness to  hfe,  ye  are  still  under  the  sentence,  *  dust  thou 
art  and  unto  dust  shalt  thou  return,'  and  there  is  no 
remedy  for  you.  Verse  18,  "  Then  they  also  who  have 
fallen  asleep  in  Christ  have  perished.     If  in  this  life  only 


THE  RESURRECTION  OUR  ONLY  HOPE.         125 

we  have  hope  in  Christ  we  are  of  all  men  most  misera- 
ble." Here  Paul  predicates  the  whole  of  the  future  ex- 
istence of  man  upon  a  resurrection  from  the  dead.  If 
there  be  no  resurrection,  there  will  be  no  future  conscious 
existence  of  any  kind.  If  the  ghosts  of  the  righteous  are 
conscious,  and  in  glory,  Paul  would  not  have  asserted 
that  they  hsiW (3  j^erished  ?  His  language  cannot  be  recon- 
ciled in  any  way  with  the  dogma  of  the  conscious  sepa- 
rate existence  of  the  spirit.  Ah  !  but  did  not  Paul  say? 
— Be  patient,  my  dear  reader,  we  shall  hear  what  Paul 
says,  bye  and  by. — We  will  pass  on  to  the  29th  verse. 
This  verse  has  been  obscured  by  passing  through  the 
hands  of  transcribers,  who,  perhaps,  being  thoroughly 
imbued  with  the  Pagan  notion  of  the  separate  existence 
of  the  spirit,  could  not  make  it  accord  with  their  creed. 
Macknight  could  render  the  verse  thus — "  Else  what 
shall  they  do,  who  are  baptized  (in  the  hope  of  a  resur- 
rection from)  the  dead,  if  the  dead  rise  not  ?  Why  are 
they  then  baptized  for  the  dead  ?"  Harwood — "  Other- 
wise, if  the  dead  are  never  to  be  reanimated,  how  forlorn 
must  be  their  hope,  who  were  baptized  in  the  firm  as- 
surance of  a  glorious  resurrection  from  the  dead  !  and 
upon  these  principles,  why  are  persons  baptized  at  ail 
into  the  belief  of  the  future  restoration  of  the  pious  dead 
to  immortality?"  Penn,  "What  will  they  who  are  baptized, 
gain  more  than  [all  the  other  dead,]  if  the  dead  rise  not 
at  all  ?"  We  could  give  more  translations,  but  till  the 
text  is  cleared  of  its  difficulties,  it  avails  little.  But  in 
every  way  it  makes  the  righteous  as  nothing  without  a 
resurrection  ;  and  so  there  are  no  separate  conscious 
spirits.  Verse  30,  "  And  why  [upon  the  supposition  that 
there  is  no  resurrection]  should  we  expose  ourselves  to 
peril  every  hour  ?"  Again,  verse  32,  "  If,  as  amongst 
men,  I  was  cast  to  wild  beasts  at  Ephesus ;  what  did  it 
profit  me,  if  the  dead  rise  not  ?  '  Let  us  eat  and  drink, 
for  to-morrow  we  die.'  "  Here  it  is  quite  evident  that 
Paul  placed  all  his  hope  of  any  existence  beyond  the 
grave  upon  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  If  there  be  no 
resurrection,  then  as  in  verse  19,  this  is  the  only  state  in 
which  we  exist,  and  it  would  be  wise  to  make  the  most 
of  the  perishing  pleasures  of  this  life,  for  it  is  all  our 
portion.  But  suppose  Paul  had  any  idea  of  the  separate 
existence  of  the  spirit,  could  he  have  used  language  like 


126  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

this  ?  "Would  it  not  have  been  absolutely  false  ?  For 
upon  the  supposition  that  the  soul,  or  spirit,  as  a  con- 
scious beino-,  could  possess  enjoyment  without  the  body, 
it  would  aftbrd  a  very  great  inducement  to  live  so  as 
to  attain  unto  this  enjoyment,  even  though  the  body 
should  never  be  raised.  But  let  it  be  always  kept  in 
mind  that  the  reunion  of  a  "  never  dying  soul,"  which 
has  never  ceased  its  consciousness,  to  a  reanimated  body, 
is  not  a  resurrection  of  the  dead^  in  any  sense.  Paul 
speaks  here  of  the  "  resurrection  of  the  dead  ;"  but  ob- 
viously the  person  resurrected  must  first  die ;  or  there 
could  be  no  restoration  to  life.  Would  not  Paul  have 
reproved  any  man  in  his  day,  if  they  had  shamefully  per- 
verted his  phrase  "  Resurrection  of  the  dead  ;'^'*  into  the 
phrase  "  Ileunion  of  soul  and  body'''' — so  flippantly  used 
in  these  days  of  fables — with  the  appropriate  though  cut- 
ting rebuke,  verse  36,  "  Foolish  man  !  The  seed  which 
thou  sow  est  is  not  re-enlivened  unless  it  die."  Mark  the 
nervous  questions  of  Paul.  Mark  his  points.  "  If  the 
DEAD  BE  not  raised"  ]  thcu,  1.  The  pious  dead,  who  are 
asleep,  have  already  perished  ;  2.  Then  our  only  hope  is 
in  this  life;  3.  Then,  faithful  Christians  are  the  most 
miserable  of  all  men  ;  4.  Then,  the  purpose  of  Christ  in 
dying  for  us,  has  been  frustrated  ;  5.  Then,  our  baptism 
has  been  in  vain ;  6.  Then,  w^hy  should  w^e  expose  our- 
selves to  peril  ?  7.  Then,  of  what  advantage  is  this  ex- 
posure to  peril  ?  8.  Then,  it  would  be  wisdom  to  make 
the  best  of  the  very  few  fleeting  moments  of  our  exis- 
tence in  this  world ;  and  9.  Then,  when  w^e  have  made 
the  most  of  the  present  life,  we  die ;  we  die,  and  that  is 
the  final  end  of  us ! !  All  these  conclusions  grow  neces- 
sarily out  of  the  supposition,  in  Paul's  mind,  that  there 
is  not  to  be  a  positive  resurrection  or  restoration  of  un- 
conscious dead  men  to  life  again.  All  these  legitimate 
deductions  are  utterly  incompatible  with  the  separate 
conscious  existence  of  either  soul  or  spirit. 

The  more  conclusively  to  prove  that  these  nine  deduc- 
tions, necessarily  result  from  the  erroneous  assertion  of 
some  in  those  days,  "  That  there  is  no  resurrection  of 
the  dead,"  (12th  v.)  Paul  goes  on  to  explain  the  nature 
of  man,  and  proves  that  all  the  life  which  we  naturally 
possess,  is  derived  from  a  man  made  of  earth,  who  was 
only  a  *'  hving  soul,"  or  a  living  animal ;  for  the  meaning 


THE  RESURRECTION  OUR  ONLY  HOPE.  127 

is  exactly  the  same.  And,  as  the  father  was  only  of  an 
earthly,  mortal,  and  corruptible  nature,  so  must  be  all 
his  childi'en.  If  we  have  nothing  but  what  has  been 
derived  from  God,  through  the  first  Adam,  we  shall 
necessarily  perish  in  the  corruption  derived  from  our 
earthly  father  :  death  will  be  the  everlasting  end  of  us. 
But  the  christian  is  to  derive  his  future  perpetual  con- 
scious existence,  not  through  his  present  animal  nature, 
but  through  a  spiritual,  or  incorruptible  nature,  pro- 
cured for  him  by  the  "  author,  archegtyro,  (of  this 
kind,)  of  life,"  whom  the  Jews  killed,  but  ^'  whom  God 
rais^ed  from  the  dead  ;"  Acts  3  :  15.  And,  before  we 
can  procure  this  incorruptible  nature,  we  "  must  be 
born  again,"  from  the  dead  ;  for  that  "  which  is  born  of 
the  ilesh,  is  flesh,"  and  "  Plesh  and  blood  cannot  inherit 
the  kingdom  of  God."  How  can  a  decaying  nature, 
inherit  an  undecaying  kingdom  ?  And  Paul,  reason- 
ing thus,  exclaims,  1  Cor,  15 :  46,  ^'  Howbeit  that  was 
NOT  FIRST  which  is  spiritual^  but  that  which  is  natural  ; 
(or,  animal ;  that  is,  soul-like;)  and  afterward,  that 
which  is  spiritual."  As  though  he  had  said,  no  man 
can  derive  any  spiritual — that  is,  incorruptible,  and  im- 
mortal— nature,  Irom  a  father,  who  himself  was  made 
only  of  dust  *  and  so  the  first  nature — the  only  one  we 
,  are  at  present  in  the  enjoyment  of— is  not  pn&iimatikon^ 
a  spiritual,  that  is,  an  immortal  nature^  but  is  only 
psuchikon^  an  animal  nature  ;  and  afterwards,  when 
we  are  raised  from  the  dead,  then  Christians,  and 
Christians  only^  will  possess  an  immortal  nature ;  "  For," 
he  argues,  •"  when  the  trumpet  shall  sound,"  the  dead 
in  Christ,  that  sleep,  "  shall  be  raised  incorruptible." 
53  v.,  "  For  this  corruptible  must  put  on  incorruption, 
jind  this  mortal  must  put  on  immortality."  Now,  death 
has  the  dominion  ;  but  when  this  is  accomphshed,  then 
^'  death  will  be  absorbed  in  victory."  Mark,  my 
reader :  those  who  are  now  corruptible,  and  now  mortal, 
are  to  put  on  something  which  they  do  not  now  possess  ; 
that  is,  incorruptibility,  which  is  immortahty.  If  it 
could  be  proved  that  man  has  about  him  natui'ally,  or 
derived  from  any  source  whatever,  any  principle — call 
it  body,  soul,  or  spirit, — which,  in  this  present  state,  is 
incorruptible  and  immortal,  it  would  overturn  tho 
masterly  argument  of  the  apostle.     We   are  all,  there- 


128  BIBLE  Vi,  TRADITIOJ^. 

fore,  perisliing  creatures,  and  the  sentence  has  gone  out 
against  every  man  :  "  Dust  thou  art,  and  unto  dust  shalt 
thou  return/^  We  are  all  condemned  to  death  ;  and  if 
God  has  conferred  upon  any  of  us  '^  the  hope  of  eternal 
life,"  and  given  us  the  earnest  of  his  spirit,  that  "  Life 
is  hid  with  Christ  in  God  :  and  when  Christ,  our  life^ 
shall  appear,  then  shall  we  also  appear  with  him  ia 
glory."  From  the  first  Adam  comes  a  complete  cessa- 
tion of  conscious  existence ;  but,  through  the  second 
Adam,  only  Christians  w^ill  be  renewed  to  an  everlasting 
conscious  existence  ;  while  the  wicked  will  be  utterly 
destroyed  for  ever ;  totally  exterminated,  root  and 
branch  ;  blotted  out  of  existence  for  ever. 

But,  "  Blessed  be  God,  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus^ 
the  Messiah,  who,  in  his  great  mercy,  has  begotten  us- 
aneWy  by  the  resurrection  of  our  Lord  Jesus ^  the  Mes- 
siah, to  the  HOPE  OF  LIFE,  and  to  an  inheritance  incor- 
ruptible, undefiled,  and  unfading,  which  is  [reserved  for 
us,]  in  [the  kingdom  of  J  heaven  ;  while  [we]  are  kept, 
by  the  power  of  God  and  by  faith,  for  the  life  that  is 
prepared,  and  tvill  be  revealed  in  the  last  times." 
(Translation  of  the  Syriac^  1  Pet.  1  :  3,  excepting  what 
is  enclosed  in  brackets.)  My  reader,  it  was  the  glorious 
resurrection  of  the  unconscious  dead  saints  to  life  again, 
that  animated  and  inspired  Paul  to  "  endure  all  things," 
and  to  "  suffer  the  loss  of  all  things,"  that  '^  he  might 
know  Christ,  and  the  power  of  his  resurrection  ;  yea,  he 
was  willing  to  participate  in  his  sufferings,  and  to  bo 
assimilated  to  his  death  ;  "  If  by  any  means  he  might 
attain  unto  the  resurrection,  that  out  from  among  the 
dead  ones  ;"  (ten  Exanastasin  ton  nekron.  Phil.  3  :  11.) 
And  Paul  thus  reasons,  (1  Cor.  15  c.,)  there  are  two 
natures,  or  two  bodies,  an  ''  animal  body,  and  a  spiritual 
body,"  for  it  is  written.  Gen.  2  :  7,  the  first  Adam  was 
only  made  into  a  living  soul,  and  therefore  was  necessa- 
rily mortal  and  corruptible-  as  all  other  living  souls  are  ; 
and  if  we  are  dependent  upon  him  alone  for  life,  we 
must  necessarily  perish.  But  the  second  Adam  was 
made  into  a  life-giving  spirit  *,  that  "  he  should  give 
eternal  hfe  to  as  many  as  thou  hast  given  him  ;"  hence, 
if  we  derive  life  from  him,  though  we  die  in  consequence 
of  our  connection  with  an  earthly  Adam,  and  the  pos- 
session of  a  nature  hke  unto  his  ;  yet  we  may  bear  tho 


THE  RESURRECTION  OUR  ONLY  HOPE.         129 

image  of  the  heavenly  Adam,  and  be  raised  again  from 
the  unconsciousness  and  corruption  inherited  from  the 
first  Adam,  to  an  incorruptible,  or  to  a  spiritual  nature ; 
even  to  that  "  life  and  incorruption,"  which  is  promised 
in  the  gospel,  a  pattern  of  which  was  exhibited  by  the 
resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead.  That  we 
have  not  mistaken  the  animal  nature  of  the  "  living 
soul,"  we  will  quote  Gen.  9  :  14,  as  literally  as  we  can  : 
"  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  when  I  cloud  a  cloud  over 
the  earth,  (that  is,  becloud  the  earth,)  that  the  bow  shall 
be  seen  in  the  cloud  ;"  15  v.  '^  And  I  will  remember  my 
covenant  which  is  between  me  and  between  you,  and 
between  every  living  soul^  (or  living  animal,  nephesh 
chayah^)  of  all  flesh  ;  and  the  waters  sliall  no  more  be- 
come a  flood  to  destroy  all  flesh."  16  v.  "  And  the  bow 
shall  be  in  the  cloud ;  and  I  will  look  upon  it,  to  remem- 
ber the  covenant  of  ages  between  Elohim,  and  between 
every  living  soul  of  all  flesh,  that  is  upon  the  earth." 
These  living  souls  of  all  flesh  that  were  saved  alive,  are 
contradistinguished  from  the  living  souls  of  all  flesh 
that  were  destroyed.  Gen.  7:21,  "  And  all  flesh  ex- 
pired that  moved  upon  the  earth,  among  fowl,  and  among 
cattle,  and  among  beast,  and  among  every  creeping 
thing  that  creepeth  upon  the  earth,  and  every  man  ;  all 
which  had  the  breath  of  the  spirit  of  lives  in  its  nostrils, 
of  all  that  w^as  in  the  dry  [landj  died."  23  v.  "  And 
every  living  substance  was  destroyed."  Thus  we  see 
that  every  creeping  creature  is  a  living  soul,  as  we  saw 
in  Gen.  1 :  20,  '^  And  the  Elohim  said,  the  waters  shall 
produce  abundantly,  the  creeping  living  soul^  and  fowl 
shall  fly  above  the  earth,  in  the  face  of  the  expanse  of 
the  heavens." 

In  Gen.  1  :  20,  24,  30,  and  2  :  19  ;  four  places  in  two 
chapters,  all  creatures  are  called  living  souls :  in  the  ori- 
ginal it  is  "  nephesh  chayiah ;"  and  if  in  all  these 
places  we  are  compelled,  by  the  context,  to  understand 
the  phrase,  "  living  soul,"  as  being  exactly  equal  to 
"  living  animal  /"  why  should  not  the  same  identical 
phrase^  when  applied  only  once  to  man,  in  one  of  the 
same  chapters.  Gen.  2 :  7,  mean  exactly  the  same  thing  ? 
And  as  God  had  endowed  the  other  animals  with  the 
same  breath  of  lives,  which  we  find  is  no  protection  from 
death,  we  are  compelled  to  understand  Gen.  2 ;  7,  "  A^d 


130  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

Jehovah  Elohim  formed  the  Adam,  dust  of  the  (adamah) 
ground,  and  {nophakh^  blowed ;  not  nophash^  breathed;) 
blowed  into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  Uves,  and  the  Adam 
became  (or  was,)  a  living  animal:"  and  such  is  evidently 
the  meaning  of  "living  soul,"  in  1  Cor.  15  :  45,  "  The 
first  man  Adam  was  made  a  hving  animal ;"  having  no 
principle  of  perpetual  life  in  him  :  and  he  is  contrasted 
in  this  very  particular  with  the  second  Author  of  a  race 
who  should  become  immortal  beings  ;  who,  being  the 
first-born  from  the  dead,  with  an  incorruptible  nature, 
is  "  made  a  life-giving  spirit." 

The  animal  nature  derived  from  the  first  Adam,  and 
the  circumstance  of  our  not  having  access  to  the  "  tree 
of  lives,"  is  the  cause  of  death.  For  through  the  ofience 
of  the  first  Adam,  death  reigns;  for  God  drove  the  man 
out  of  the  garden,  "  Lest  he  put  forth  his  hand,  and 
take  also  of  the  tree  of  lives,  and  eat,  and  live  for  ever.''^ 
And  so  we  are  taught  to  seek  for  what  we  do  not  now 
possess,  Rom.  2 :  7,  "  To  those  who,  by  patient  con- 
tinuance in  well  doing,  seek  for  glory,  and  honor,  and 
incorruption,"  God,  in  giving  them  the  incorruptible 
nature,  necessarily  renders  to  them  "  eternal  life."  Thus 
we  are  forced  to  the  same  conclusion  as  was  Paul :  1. 
That  man  is  mortal ;  2.  That  immortality  is  conditional ; 
3.  That  no  man  will  obtain  it  till  the  resurrection  ;  4. 
That  we  can  obtain  it  only  through  faith  in  Jesus  Christ ; 
and,  5.  That  the  wicked,  possessing  only  an  animal  na- 
ture, and  refusing  to  come  to  Christ  that  they  may  have 
life,  will  necessarily  become  extinct,  under  the  infliction 
of  the  righteous  judgment  of  God. 

At  the  commencement  of  this  celebrated  chapter, 
Paul  says,  Christ  died,  according  to  the  Scriptures ;  and 
that  Christ  was  raised  again  from  the  dead.  And  he 
tells  us,  that  it  is  the  keeping  in  memory  this  gospel, 
"  By  which  also  ye  are  saved."  Now  we  would  affec- 
tionately ask,  is  a  belief  of  the  natural  immortality  of 
man,  or  of  his  soul,  or  of  his  spirit,  or  of  the  separate 
conscious  existence  of  either  soul  or  spirit,  compatible 
with  the  belief  of  the  gospel  facts:  1.  That  Jesus  Christ, 
the  Son  of  God,  truly  died,  gave  up  the  whole  of  the 
life  he  possessed,  that  the  Holy  One  was  unconscious  for 
a  Hmited  period  in  the  heart  of  the  earth  ;  and,  2.  That 
God  raised  the  unconscious  being — whom  he  says  he 


roUNTAIN  OP  IMMORTALITY.  131 

has  begotten  from  the  dead,  and  whom  he  calls  his  Son 
— from  a  state  of  unconsciousness  and  of  death,  to  a 
state  of  life  again  ?  Can  an  individual,  schooled  in  the 
fables  of  the  day,  and  still  maintaining  them,  truly 
believe  in  the  revivification  of  dead  men  ?  Manifestly, 
he  cannot 

We  call  the  attention  of  our  Universalist  friends,  to 
the  important  fact,  that  this  chapter  is  addressed  to 
Christian  brethren^  and  through  it,  he  speaks  only  of  the 
resurrection  of  Christians,  and  nothing  about  the  resur- 
rection of  the  wicked,  unless  such  allusion  be  found  in 
the  22  ver.,  which  is  susceptible,  in  an  isolated  state,  of 
two  interpretations  :  1.  For  as  in  Adam  all  men,  whether 
righteous  or  wicked,  die;  even  so  in  Christ  shall  the 
same  all  be  made  alive  again  by  a  resurrection  ;  or,  2. 
For  as  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  shall  all  that  are  in 
Christ,  (the  «/^  of  the  18  ver.  that  have  fallen  asleep  in 
Christ,  which,  but  for  a  resurrection,  have  perished,)  be 
made  alive  by  a  resurrection.  The  first  interpretation 
proves  a  general  resurrection,  without  specifying  what 
will  be  the  fate  of  the  wicked  \  the  second  is  more  in 
accordance  with  the  whole  of  the  chapter.  So  there  is 
no  part  of  the  chapter  that  helps  forward  the  theory  of 
the  Universahst.  Harwood  thus  translates  it :  "  For  as 
by  Adam,  all  the  human  race  were  subjected  to  mor- 
tahty  :  so,  by  Christ  Jesus,  shall  all  the  pious  dead  be 
entitled  to  immortality."  And  this  translation  connects 
admirably  with  the  preceding  and  succeeding  verses. 

Those  who  rightly  appreciate  the  importance  of  the 
fundamental  gospel  doctrine,  of  "  Life  only  through 
Christ  Jesus,"  and  understand  the  tenacity  with  which 
even  pious  persons,  cling  to  the  fables  in  which  they 
have  been  educated,  will  readily  excuse  our  lengthened 
exposition  of  the  masterly  argument  of  the  apostle. 

ITim.  6:  11-16,  Paul,  after  exhorting  Timothy  to 
^^  lay  hold  on  eternal  life,"  as  of  a  something  that  might 
be  lost,  charges  him  before  God,  who  giveth  life  to  all, 
that  he  would  keep  that  charge  until  the  appearing  of 
Jesus  Christ,  who,  in  his  own  times,  would  manifest  the 
"  blessed  and  only  Potentate,  the  King  of  kings,  and 
Lord  of  lords,  who  only  hath  immortality,  dwelling  in 
light  unapproachable,  whom  no  man  hath  seen  nor  can 
Bee."    We  understanding  this  as  affirming  that  there  is 


1  32  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION* 

only  one  Being,  whose  face  no  man  can  see  and  live, 
the  only  God,  who  possesses  immortality,  or  who  cannot 
be  subjected  to  death  by  virtue  of  his  original  nature. 
And  that  all  other  beings,  including  the  Bon  of  God, 
angels,  and  men,  who  are  now  not  subject  to  death,  or 
are  immortal, have  undergone  a  change  from  their  original 
natures,  and  have  become  incorruptible,  and  hence,  im- 
mortal. God  only  is  naturally  immortal, — the  only 
Being  not  subject  to  death,  as  the  word  athanasia  [a^ 
without,  thanasia^  death,  deathless ;  or,  as  a  noun, 
deathlessness  ;]  implies.  The  Son  of  God  was  made 
subject  to  death,  but  now  "  death  hath  no  more  dominion 
over  him  ;"  and  he  can  say,  ''  I  am  he  that  liveth,  and 
was  dead  ;  and  behold,  I  am  alive  for  evermore.  Amen." 
"  And  those  who  shall  be  accounted  worthy  to  obtain 
that  age,  and  the  resurrection,  out  from  among  the  dead 
ones,  ....  cannot  die  any  more,  ....  being  the  sons  of 
the  resurrection."  Eev.  1  :  18  ;  Luke  20  :  35.  This 
single  passage  ought  to  settle  the  question  for  ever, 
regarding  the  natural  mortahty  of  man.  If  this  passage 
be  true,  then  man  has  no  "  deathless  spirit,"  or  "  never- 
dying  soul,"  to  survive  the  death  of  the  body.  The 
attempt  to  avert  the  force  of  this  passage,  by  asserting 
that  God  only  has  "  independent"  immortality,  will  not 
avail.  The  expression  is  absolute  and  unquahfied,  and 
no  creature  has  immortahty,  independent,  or  derived,  in 
virtue  of  his  original  nature. 

Immortahty  is  predicated  upon  incorruptibihty  of 
nature  ;  this  nature  is  ascribed  to  God,  as  pecuharly  his 
own.  1  Tim.  1  :  17,  "Unto  the  King  of  the  ages,  mcor- 
ruptihle^  invisible,  the  only  God,  be  honor,  and  glory, 
for  ages  of  ages,  Amen."  The  word  translated  incorrup- 
tible, is,  o/phthartos  ;  «,  without,  and  phthartos^  corrup- 
tion ;  not  subject  to  decay.  This  word  is  interchanged 
with,  and  associated  with  immortahty,  in  1  Cor.  1 5.  This 
word  is  translated  immortal,  and  immortahty,  in  Kom. 
2  :  7  ;  1  Tim.  1 :  17 ;  2  Tim.  1 :  10  ;  and  in  some  of  the  ver- 
sions, in  Rom.  I  :  23,  "  Professing  to  be  wise,  they 
became  fools,  and  changed  the  glory  of  the  incorruptible 
(or  immortal)  God,  into  the  likeness  of  an  image  of 
corruptible  (or  mortal)  man,  and  (into  the  likeness  of  an 
image)  of  corruptible,  or  mortal,  birds,  and  [&c.]  of  four- 
footed  beasts,  and  of   creeping  things,"     Here  man, 


BEARING  OF  THE  TESTIMONY.  133 

associated  with  creeping  things,  is  called  corruptible  and 
mortal,  and  is  contrasted  with  God  on  this  very  point, 
who  is  incorruptible  and  immortal. 

THE  BEARING  OF  THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE   UNCONSCIOUSNESS 
OF  THE  DEAD  UPON  THE  QUESTION  OF  IMMORTALITY. 

If  it  could  be  proved  that  man  has  a  separate  soul, 
or  spirit,  that  can  live  while  the  man  is  dead,  which  is 
an  absurdity,  it  would  not  necessarily  prove  that  that 
separate  soul,  or  spirit,  would  never  cease  to  live.  Its 
living  energies  might  wear  out,  or  God  might  destroy 
it.  But,  on  the  contrary,  if  we  have  proved  that  man 
has  no  such  separate  conscious  soul,  or  spirit,  but  that 
he,  as  a  unit,  descends  into  the  grave,  then  we  clearly 
establish  the  mortality  of  the  whole  man  ;  and,  hkewise, 
the  dependence  of  man  upon  the  resurrection  for  all 
future  life.  We  also  establish  the  fact,  which  ought 
never  to  have  been  doubted,  that  the  words  immortahty, 
incorruptibility,  hfe,  death,  destruction,  corruption,  and 
such  like,  are  words  to  be  always  understood  in  their 
plain  and  obvious  meaning. 

Now,  may  we  be  permitted  to  ask  those  who  love  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  sincerely,  and  the  truths  he  promul- 
gated :  shall  dogmas  that  make  void  the  oiBfers  of  hfe 
through  Jesus  Christ,  and  undermine  the  very  founda- 
tion of  the  gospel — as  do  those  of  the  natural  immortality 
of  man,  and  the  separate  conscious  existence  of  either 
soul  or  spirit — be  attempted  to  be  explained  by  a  few 
flimsy  inferences,  rashly  and  unfairly  drawn  from  a  few 
texts,  imperfectly  understood,  in  which  it  obviously  was 
not  the  design  of  the  writers  to  discuss  or  teach  any 
such  subjects  ?  These  dogmas,  that  practically  deny 
that  Christ  is  our  life  ;  that  explain  away  the  gospel 
hope  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead ;  that  put  the  honor 
on  the  first  Adam,  that  belongs  exclusively  to  the 
second  ; — ought  to  have  better  grounds  than  rash  infer- 
ences. Pagan  fables,  or  the  metaphysical  deductions  of 
a  vain  philosophy  ! 

But  we  shrink  not  from  investigation,  and  desire  our 
opponents  to  bring  forward  their  strongest  reasons. 


134 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


OBJECTIONS    EXAMINED. 

"We  shall  notice  the  principal  texts  from  which  our 
opponents  have  drawn  inferences  ;  some  of  which,  being 
connected  with  the  topics  under  discussion,  have  been 
already  examined  ;  some  others,  connected  with  the 
punishment  of  the  wicked,  will  be  found  under  their 
appropriate  headings. 

The  theories  we  are  opposing  are  very  accommodating. 
Having  invented  the  fables  of  the  separate  conscious  ex- 
istence of  the  souls  or  spirits  of  dead  men,  these  theorists 
require  a  place  or  places  where  they  may  be  placed  till 
'''-reunited'^  with  their  bodies;  or,  according  to  some, 
w^here  they  can  exist  forever  without  their  grosser  bodies, 
which — and  they  rejoice  in  the  idea — are  left  in  the  grave. 
We  will  recite  some  of  the  places,  where  these  souls  or 
spirits  are  said  to  reside.  1.  Where  God  and  Christ  are. 
2.  Beyond  the  bounds  of  time  and  space.  3.  Paradise  in 
the  skies.  4.  The  third  heavens.  5.  Three  spheres  into 
which  the  spirits  are  placed,  according  with  the  several 
states  of  progress.  6.  The  atmosphere.  7.  Wandering 
about  the  earth  as  guardian  spirits  to  friends  on  earth, 
or  as  evil  demons  haunting  those  who  had  injured  them 
while  they  abode  in  fleshly  tabernacles.  8.  A  place  in 
the  earth,  divided  into  two  apartments  ;  in  one  of  which, 
— called  Paradise — good  souls  are  placed  in  conscious 
enjoyment.  9.  In  the  other  the  wicked  souls  are  placed, 
in  conscious  suffering.  10.  Purgatory.  11.  A  horrid 
place  called  hell,  burning  with  fire  and  brimstone,  which 
is  generally  located  near  the  centre  of  the  earth,  and 
esteemed  to  be  far  apart  from  the  abode  of  the  righteous. 


THE    WITCH   OF    ENDOR.  135 

12.  The  poetical  ^  spirit  land ;'  the  precise  locality  of 
which  the  poets  have  not  condescended  to  inform  us. — 
And  13.  In  Abraham's  bosom.  Some  consider  the  soul 
as  an  abstract  essence,  immaterial  and  invisible.  Others 
that  the  soul  is  clothed  with  a  sort  of  etherial  vehicle  or 
body,  tangible  and  visible.  Some,  that  the  soul  can 
assume  at  will  a  grosser  or  more  etherial  medium,  accord- 
ing to  circumstances. 

Is  it  wonderful,  that  in  a  book  written  in  various  lan- 
guages, a  long  time  ago,  in  an  Eastern  country  glowing 
with  poetry,  and  full  of  highly  wrought  figures  of  speech, 
acting  upon  imaginations  proud  and  tenacious  of  their 
fancied  immortality,  and  having  such  various  and  indefi- 
nite notions  of  their  own  imaginings  ;  is  it  strange  that 
an  inference  should  occasionally  be  drawn  that  seemingly 
favored  one  of  these  views  ?  These  persons,  sitting  by 
the  bed-side  of  the  dying  Christian,  and  never  leaving 
him,  till  they  deposited  him  in  the  grave,  will  still  affirm 
that  his  spirit  went,  as  a  conscious  being,  to  God.  Did 
they  see  it  ?  No.  It  is  immaterial,  and  invisible.  An- 
other will  tell  us  that  they  distinctly  saw  the  spirit  of 
their  departed  friend,  and  can  describe  his  dress  and  ap- 
pearance. Another  will  infer  that  the  disembodied  spirit 
of  Moses  was  visible  on  the  Mount  of  Transfiguration, 
and  that  the  spirit  of  the  thief  was  with  Christ  in  Para- 
dise, the  same  day  and  at  the  same  time  that  he  was  alive 
upon  the  cross,  and  that  the  spirit  of  Christ  was  in  Para- 
dise, in  heaven,  where  his  Father  is,  and  in  hell,  preach- 
ing, at  the  same  time. 

THE    WITCH   OF    ENDOR. 

Where  are  Samuel  and  the  prophets  ?  In  the  heavens, 
most  would  answer ;  and  yet  they  would  say,  the  witch 
raised  up  Samuel  from  the  earth.  See  the  account,  1  Sam. 
28  c.  We  suppose  this  woman,  like  the  mediums  of  the 
present  day,  by  the  familiar  spirit,  or  devil,  was  enabled 
to  impose  upon  the  king.  God  answered  him  not, 
"  neither  by  dreams,  nor  by  Urim,  nor  by  prophets  ;"  and 
we  are  very  sure  that  God  did  not  permit  Samuel,  who 
was  one  of  the  prophets,  to  answer  him.  Saul  does  not 
say.  Bring  me  down  the  soul  or  spirit  of  Samuel  from 
heaven  •  but  "  Bring  me  up  Samuel."     And  the  record, 


136  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

which  we  suppose  was  a  record  of  the  impression  made 
upon  Saul  and  his  two  servants,  says,  that  "  the  woman 
saw  Samueiy  The  whole  account  is  not  more  mysteri- 
ous than  the  revelations  of  these  latter  days.  Samuel 
came  up  from  the  ground,  and  proclaimed  that  ^Ho-mor- 
row  shalt  thou  and  thy  sons  be' with  me."  Mark  the 
woman's  prediction,  that  the  ivicked  Saul  should  be  in 
the  same  place  with  the  righteous  Samuel ;  and  Samuel, 
not  as  a  ghost,  but  in  proper  person,  "  ascended  out  of 
the  earthy  Eegarding  this  aft'air,  merely  as  a  clever  im- 
position practiced  by  the  woman,  with  perhaps  the  aid 
of  her  familiar  spirit,  or  devil,  we  shall  not  give  a  length- 
ened exposition.  But  be  warned  ;  1  Chron,  10  :  13. — 
"  So  Saul  died  for  his  transgression  which  he  committed 
against  the  Lord,  even  against  the  word  of  the  Lord, 
which  he  kept  not,  and  also  for  asking  [-]  of  [-]  a  fami- 
liar spirit,  to  [dorash)  earnestly  search  of  it ;  and  earn- 
estly sought  not  of  the  Lord  :  therefore  he  slew  him." 
Lev.  20  :  G,  "  The  soul  that  turneth  after  such  as  have 

familiar  spirits I  will  set  my  face  against  Ma^  sow/,  and 

will  cut  him  off."  See  also  Isa.  8  :  19,  "  Should  a  peo- 
ple seek  to  the  dead,  concerning  the  living  ?  Should 
they  not  seek  unto  their  God  ?  Should  they  not  seek 
unto  the  law  and  to  the  testimony  :  if  the  [spirits]  speak 
not  according  to  this  word,  it  is  because  there  is  no 
light  in  them." 

Paul's  desire  to  depart  and  be  with  christ. 

Did  Paul  desire  to  depart  and  be  with  Christy  and  to  he 
absent  from  the  body  and  present  with  the  JLord^  in  the 
sense  of  dying  ? 

Phil.  1  :  21,  "  For  me  to  live  is  Christ;  but  to  die  is 
gain.  But  if  I  live  in  the  flesh,  this  is  the  fruit  of  my 
labor :  which  yet  I  shall  choose  I  know  not.  For  I  am  in 
a  strait  betw^een  the  two,  having  a  desire  to  depart  and 
to  be  with  Christ  which  is  far  better." 

From  these  words  some  infer  that  Paul  would  depart 
at  death,  as  a  disembodied  spirit,  to  Christ,  and  that 
Paul  desired  thus  to  depart.  Samuel  and  Saul  were  to 
go  down^  but  Paul,  they  infer,  must  go  up.  Paul  says 
no  such  thing.     He  says,  3  :  10  ;  "  That  he  was  willing 


Paul's  desire  to  depart.  137 

to  be  partaker  of  Christ's  suiSerings  ;  if  by  any  means  he 
might  attain  unto  the  resurrection,  that  out  from  among 
the  dead."  20  v.  '^  For  our  citizenship  is  enrolled  in 
heaven,  from  whence  also  we  look  for  a  vivitier,  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  who  will  change  our  vile  bodies  (or  natures) 
into  the  likeness  of  his  glorious  body,"  or  nature,  when 
he  comes.  So  in  this  very  epistle,  as  in  all  the  others, 
he  points  to  the  coming  of  Christ,  as  the  period  when  he 
expected  to  be  with  Christ.  In  the  10th  v.  of  the  same 
1  c,  he  points  the  Philhppians  to  "  the  day  of  Christ," 
as  the  period  when  he  prayed  that  they  might  be  found 
"  without  offence,"  and  receive  their  reward ;  and  tells 
the  Thessalonians,  "  That  we  which  are  alive  and  remain 
unto  the  coming  of  the  Lord,  shall  not  go  before  those 
that  are  asleep  ;"....  but  "  be  caught  up  together  with 
them  in  the  clouds,  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air,"  and 
thenceforward  for  "  ever  be  with  the  Lord  :"  (1  Thess. 
4 :  15.)  Could  he  in  the  23  v.  of  1  Phil,  say  that  he  ex- 
pected, or  even  desired  to  be  with  Christ  prior  to  the 
period  of  his  coming  ?  Will  the  reader  refer  to  the 
period  when  the  righteous  are  to  receive  their  rewards  on 
a  subsequent  page  ?  Prov.  30  :  4,  "  Who  hath  ascended 
up  into  heaven,  or  descended  ?"  John  3  :  13,  "No  man 
hath  ascended  up  to  heaven,  but  he  that  came  down  from 
heaven."  Heb.  9 :  7, 11, 12,  "  Into  the  second  [tabernacle] 
went  the  high  priest  alone  once  every  year ;  ....  but 
Christ  being  come  ....  entered  in  once  into  the  holy 
place."  None  but  the  high  priest  was  to  enter  there 
upon  peril  of  death.  Heb.  8:5,  "  And  these  things 
serve  unto  the  example  and  shadow  of  the  heavenly 
things."  How  then  could  Paul  expect  to  enter  into  the 
true  tabernacle,  into  which  none  other  than  the  great 
high  priest  is  allowed  to  enter  ? 

If  we  turn  to  2  Cor.  5  :  5-10,  we  find  that  Paul  uses 
the  term  body  in  the  sense  of  person,  as  at  present  con- 
stituted, and  as  "  flesh  and  blood  cannot  inherit  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,"  Paul  was  desirous  that  his  connec- 
tion with  his  corruptible  nature  might  cease  "  that  mor- 
tality might  be  swallowed  up  of  life."  God  had  given 
him  "  the  earnest  of  the  spirit,"  and  he  knew  that  "  If 
the  spirit  of  him  that  raised  up  Jesus  from  the  dead 
dwelt  in  him,  he  that  raised  up  Christ  from  the  dead, 
would  also  re-enliven  his  mortal  body  on  account  of  his 


t^  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

spirit  that  dwelt  in  him  :"  Rom.  8:11,  19-25.  "While 
we  are  at  home  in  the  body,"  whether  that  body  be  liv- 
ing or  dead,  we  are  associated  with  corruption,  and  as 
"  corruption  doth  not  inherit  incorruption,"  we  are  neces- 
sarily "  absent  from  the  Lord,"  and  from  his  incorruptible 
kingdom,  whether  we  be  living  upon  the  earth,  or  sleep- 
ing in  unconscious  dust  in  the  grave  ;  for  our  connection 
with  dust  and  corruption  does  not  cease  until  the  "Author 
of  Life,"  or  "  Life-giver,"  "  DeUver  us  from  the  bondage 
of  corrui)tion,  into  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of 
God."  For  those  "  Are  the  children  of  God,  being  the 
children  of  the  resurrection  :"  Luke  20  :  36.  Therefore 
we,  who  "  are  at  home  in  the  body,"  which  is  corruptible, 
we  "  which  have  the  first  fruits  of  the  spirit,  even  we  our- 
selves groan  within  ourselves,  waiting  for  the  adoption, 
to  wit,  the  redemption  of  our  body,"  from  its  state  of 
corruption,  by  a  change,  if  living,  or  by  a  resurrection 
from  the  dead,  if  dead,  "  when  Christ,  who  is  our  Ufe, 
shall  appear."  "  For  the  earnest  expectation  of  the  crea- 
ture waitethfor  the  manifestation  of  the  sons  of  God^ — 
"  For  we  are  saved  by  hope."  "  We  walk  by  faith,  not 
by  sight,  we  are  confident,  I  say,  and  wilhng  rather  to  be 
absent  from  the  body" (of  corruption) "and  to  be  present" 
(in  our  glorified  bodies)  "  with  the  Lord ....  For  we 
must  all  appear  before  the  judgment  seat  of  Christ ;  that 
every  one  may  receive  retribution  in  the  body^  according 
to  what  he  hath  done  in  it,  whether  of  good,  or  whether 
of  evil." 

Thus  we  see  that  the  passage  in  2  Cor.  5 :  6,  and  the 
passage  in  Phil.  1  :  23,  mutually  explain  each  other,  sup- 
posing that  Phil.  1 :  23  has  been  rightly  translated  ;  for 
Paul  might  very  consistently,  epithumian^  "  earnestly 
desire  to  depart,"  from  his  present  state  of  existence,  in 
connection  w^ith  corruption,  and  "  to  be  with  Christ,"  in 
his  incorruptible  and  therefore  immortal  nature,  "  which 
is  far  better"  than  either  living — in  a  state  of  suffering, 
peril,  hardships,  and  cruel  persecutions — or  dyings  and 
being  exempted  from  all  these  ;  ^^waiting^'^  in  the  silence 
of  the  grave  till  his  "  change  should  come,"  and  he  be 
awakened  out  of  his  sleep,  "  w^hen  the  Lord  himself  shall 
descend /ro??i  heaven."  He  knew  that  whether  he  lived 
or  died,  Christ  should  be  magnified  in  his  body.  For  if 
he  lived,  he  would  promote  the  cause  of  Christ ;  and  if 


139 

he  died.,  his  becoming  a  sacrifice  on  the  altar  of  Truth, 
would  still  be  gain  to  the  cause  of  Christ,  and  cause  the 
gospel  to  become  matter  of  greater  notoriety  in  all  other 
places,  V.  13  ;  and  as  bis  faith  had  divested  death  of  all 
its  terrors,  and  as  life  was  accompanied  with  such  toil 
and  suffering,  he  did  not  know  which  to  choose,  whether 
to  choose  to  live  longer  or  to  choose  to  die,  and  end  his 
sufferings.  Mark,  reader  !  He  was  perplexed  between 
the  TWO,  whether  to  choose  life,  or  to  choose  death,  they 
were  both  equally  indifferent  to  him  ;  but  there  was  a 
third  thing  that  Paul  possessed  (epithumian),  an  earnest 
desire  for  ;  but  that  tJiird  thing  was  obviously  not  either 
of  the  former  two  indifferent  ones,  and  must  therefore  be 
something  distinct  from  dying  and  going  immediately  to 
Christ ;  for  dying,  or  death,  was  one  of  the  things  that 
he  did  not  deem  so  greatly  preferable  to  life  as  to  decide 
his  choice.  But  again,  this  third  thing  was  "far  better." 
Better  than  what  ?  Better  than  Hfe,  better  than  death, 
therefore  death  could  not  be  the  thing  desired.  We 
have  shown  that  Paul  might  very  consistently  with  his 
previous  sentiments,  expressed  in  Rom.  8,  and  2  Cor.  4 : 
and  5  :  earnestly  desire  to  depart^  nay,  he  did  thus  earn- 
estly desire  to  depart  from  this  body  of  corruption ;  not 
that  he  might  be  found  unclothed,  but  clothed  upon  ; 
that  "this  corruptible  might  put  on  incorruption  ;"  and 
he  thus  "  be  for  ever  with  the  Lord ;"  not  as  a  disem- 
bodied spirit,  but  in  that  "  hfe  and  incorruption,"  a  pat- 
tern of  which  "  was  manifested  in  the  resurrection  of 
Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead."  In  this  sense  we  have  no 
objection  to  the  theology  of  the  text  as  it  now  stands. — 
The  text  will  no  way  sustain  the  altogether  unwarranted 
inference,  that  Paul  desired  to  die,  that  his  disembodied 
spirit^  as  a  conscious  ghost,  might  depart  and  be  with 
Christ. 

As  we  know  that  many  will  still  fondly  cling  to  this 
text,  we  will  analize  it  again.  Do  you  ask,  How  then  it 
would  be  gain  to  Paul  to  die  ?  Paul  does  not  say  it 
would  be  gain  to  him.  Fill  up  the  ellipsis  according  to 
grammatical  laws. — "  For  me  to  hve,  will  be  gain  to  the 
cause  of  Christ ;  for  Christ  will,  at  all  events,  be  magni- 
fied in  my  body,  whether  by  my  life,  or  by  my  death. — 
And  for  me  to  die  is  gain  to  the  cause  of  Christ,  for 
Christ  will  be  magnified  in  ray  body,  whether  /  die  or 
whether  Hive?'* 


140  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

If  you  insist  that  it  would  be  gain  to  Paul  to  die,  we 
reply,  he  does  not  say  so  ;  and  if  it  would  be  gain  to  him 
personally,  then  he  would  not  be  in  perplexity  which  to 
choose  ;  he  would  have  chosen  death,  and  thereby  have 
magnified  Christ  and  benefitted  himself  at  the  same  time; 
and  Christ  would  have  employed  other  instrumentahties 
to  proclaim  the  gospel,  and  Paul,  on  your  supposition, 
would  be  no  loser.  We  affirm,  that  the  position  of  Paul 
was  not  so  bad  in  his  own  estimation,  as  the  position  of 
afflicted  Job  was  in  his  (Job's)  estimation.  He  said, 
*'  My  soul  chooses  strangling  rather  than  life,"  &c. ;  but 
Paul  does  not  know  which  to  choose.  We  acknowledge 
that  Paul  might  have  been  a  gainer  by  death  in  some 
respects,  for  he  would  then  rest  from  his  labors,  and  his 
works  would  follow  him ;  and  he  would  gain  deliverance 
from  all  his  trials  and  persecutions ;  for  irrespective  of 
the  hopes  of  a  future  life,  based  upon  a  resurrection  from 
the  dead,  Paul  says,  "  we  (Christians)  are  of  all  men  most 
miserable."  I  Cor.  15.  So  that  if  we  suppose  it  might, 
in  some  sense,  be  gain  to  Paul  to  die,  though  his  disem- 
bodied spirit  did  not  go  to  Christ  in  living  consciousness, 
you  gain  nothing  by  this  supposition. 

Again,  who  does  Paul  mean  by  the  pronouns  ''we"  and 
u  p)  2  They  evidently  relate  to  the  same  person,  or 
thing.  If  you  say,  they  relate  to  his  soul,  or  his  spirit, 
then  you  make  Paul  say,  it  would  be  gain  for  his  soul  or 
spirit — which  ever  you  prefer — to  die  !!!  But  if  the  ^me* 
and  '/'  refer  to  Paul's  soul  or  spirit,  then  his  body  cer- 
tainly was  not  involved  in  the  death  !!!  Now  if  the  hne'' 
and  '/,'  so  often  expressed,  refer  only  to  a  part  of  Paul, 
and  that  part  the  "  never  dying  soul,"  or  "  the  deathless 
spirit,"  one  of  which  you  will  probably  claim  as  the 
essential  Paul ;  when  Paul  talks  of  the  death  of  the  '/' 
and  the  ';?^e,'  that  is  the  death  of  his  soul  or  of  his  spirit; 
will  you  be  kind  enough  to  inform  us  what  becomes  of 
his  body  ?  If  you  shall  venture  to  say,  that  dying  and 
death,  refer  only  to  the  body,  and  '  to  depart^''  means  to 
die,  then  you  make  Paul  say  that  he  earnestly  desired 
that  his  body  should  die^  and  that  Ids  body  should  depart 
and  be  with  Christy  which  was  far  better  than  for  his 
body  to  live ;  for  evidently  the  /  that  Paul  desired  might 
be  with  Christ,  was  the  same  1  that  was  to  live  or  die  !!! 
Pray,  then,  what  becomes  of  his  soul  or  spirit  ?     Now 


141 

i' 

suppose  you  throw  away  your  untenable  hypothesis  of 
the  double  or  triple  entity  of  man ^  and  beheve  that  Paul 
spoke  of  himself  as  an  inseparable  itnit^  and  you  will  at 
once  become  disentangled  from  your  otherwise  inextrica- 
ble difficulties.  We  see  that  Paul  could  not  desire  to 
depart  in  the  sense  of  dying,  that  an  undefinable  some- 
thing might  go  to  Christ  and  live  with  him  while  Paul 
himself  was  dead.  Thus  it  is  evident — irrespective  of 
our  previous  deductions — the  notion  that  Paul  desired  to 
die,  ''  that  his  disembodied  spirit,"  as  a  living,  conscious 
entity,  "  might  depart  and  be  with  Christ,"  is  an  inference 
entirely  unwarranted ;  and  indeed,  when  examined,  we 
find  it  without  any  rational  proof 

By  the  adoption  of  this  double  nature,  and  double  en- 
tity principle,  we  may  hide  the  true  sense  of  the  plainest 
passages  of  Scripture.  But  if  this  principle  of  interpre- 
tation be  apphcable  to  one  case  li  must  be  applicable  to 
all.  Try  the  working  of  it.  But  first,  we  ask  our  read- 
ers to  answer  to  themselves  satisfactorily  this  question — 
Do  the  personal  pronouns  I,  me,  my,  him,  and  such  like, 
apply  to  the  whole  person  or  being,  or  only  to  a  part  of 
the  man  ?  If  you  refuse  to  acknowledge  that  these  pro- 
nouns apply  to  the  man,  in  his  whole  nature,  or  person- 
ality— to  the  man  as  a  unit,  inseparable  without  loss,  and 
dead  without  the  spirit,  which  though  the  cause  of  fife, 
is  not  a  living  thing, — then  we  require  you  to  affix  first, 
the  definite  part,  intended  by  them,  and  then  strictly  to 
adhere  to  their  application  to  that  part  alone  in  all  cases ^ 
and  not  ring  the  changes  upon  them,  lest  they  should 
disturb  some  favorite  theory.  Gal.  4  :  20,  *' '  I'  desire  to 
be  present  with  you  now."  Did  Paul  desire  as  a  disem- 
bodied spirit  to  be  with  the  Galatians  ?  1  Cor.  16  :  12, 
*'  As  touching  our  brother  Apollos,  *  I'  greatly  desire 
him  to  come  unto  you."  Not  his  spirit,  but  himself 
John  20 :  17,  "  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Touch  me  not  ;  for 
'  /'  am  not  yet  ascended  to  my  Father."  Some  have 
aaid  Christ  only  meant  his  body  ;  and  why  not  apply  the 
'  V  to  the  body  of  Paul  ?  Gen.  37  :  35,  "  For  /  will  go 
down  into  the  grave  unto  my  son  mourning."  Acts  2  : 
34,  "  For  David  is  not  ascended  into  the  heavens  :  but 
he  saith  himself'''  &c.  The  personality  of  Christ,  of  Ja- 
cob, and  of  David,  is  here  spoken  of;  yet  some  say,  the 
pronouns,  and  even  the  name  David,  refer  only  to  the 


142  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

body  as  being  separate  from  the  man.  Now,  my  friends, 
apply  your  own  principle  of  interpretation  to  Phil.  1  :  23, 
and  when  Paul  says  ''  '  I'  desire  to  depart  and  to  be  with 
Christ,"  he  could  only  refer,  you  being  consistent^  to  his 
body.  And  Paul,  to  have  been  very  exphcit,  ought  to 
have  said,  *'  I  desire  my  body  to  depart  and  to  be  with 
Christ,  while  my  disembodied  spirit  shall  still  be  confined 
in  bonds  in  the  prison  at  Kome"  !  !  !  Now  we  intend  to 
quote  you  two  passages  that  do  look  more  like  this 
double  entity  notion,  this  separate  existence  of  the  spirit, 
than  any  other  passages  in  the  whole  Bible  ;  and  if  you 
will  agree  that  these  separate  the  man  into  distinct  parts, 
then  you  will  have  the  shadow  of  an  excuse  for  the  appli- 
cation of  this  principle,  of  the  separate  conscious  exis- 
tence of  the  spirit,  to  other  places  ;  and  we  shall  be  dis 
posed  to  give  you  more  credit  for  consistency,  than  we 
can  do  for  intelligence. 

Col.  2:5,"  For  though  '  I'  be  absent  in  the  fleshy  yet 
*  I'  am  with  you  in  the  spirit^  joying  and  beholding  your 
order,  and  the  steadfastness  of  your  faith  in  Christ." 
Here  you  must  perceive  that  Paul  states,  his  spirit  ivas 
rejoicing  with  the  disciples  at  Colosse,  while  his  Jiesh, 
which  must  include  his  body,  was  ajprwower  at  Rome, 
(See  4  c.  10  v.)  That  his  spirit,  acting  as  a  living  entity, 
was  in  a  distinct  place,  and  hundreds  of  miles  distant 
from  his  flesh  ! !  1  Cor.  5:3,"  For  '  /'  verily,  as  absoit 
in  body^  but  present  in  spirit^  have  judged  already,  as 
though  I  were  present^  concerning  him  that  hath  so  done 
this  deed,  in  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  when 
ye  are  gathered  together,  and  my  spirit^  with  the  power 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  to  dehver  such  a  one  unto  Sa- 
tan for  the  destruction  of  the  fleshy  that  the  spirit  may 
be  saved  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  Jesus."  We  suppose 
the  latter  part  of  the  verse  may  mean,  that  the  man  was 
to  be  esteemed  as  belonging  to  the  world,  till  he  had  ac- 
quired an  ascendancy  over  his  animal  appetites  ;  that  he 
himself,  or,  what  is  the  same  thing,  his  life  might  be 
saved  when  Christ  comes.  Such  is  the  meaning  Paul 
applies  to  flesh  and  spirit  in  Eom.  7  and  8  c.  In  this 
last  quotation,  we  find  the  body  of  Paul  at  Philijypi^  and 
his  spirit  at  Corinth^  at  the  same  time.  And  though 
Paul  explains  himself,  '  as  though  I  were  present,'  yet 
he  associates  ^  my  spirit'*  with  them,  in  passing  judg- 


143 

ment  on  the  delinquent  brother.  We  have  one  more 
quotation,  which  is  apphcable  to  every  case  where  you 
think  you  can  find  an  illustration  of  the  separate  con- 
scious existence  of  the  spirit :  and  we  concede  that  James 
does  speak  of  the  spirit  as  a  separate  thing  from  the 
body  ;  but  mark,  not  as  a  separate  conscious  thing.  Jas. 
2  :  26,  "  The  body  without  the  sjiirit  is  deaciy  And  il 
the  body  without  the  spirit  be  dead,  if  the  argument  ol 
James  is  worth  any  thing,  then  is  the  spirit  without  the 
body  destitute  of  hfe  also.  You  need  not  look  to  your 
margins,  for  the  word  is  {pneuma)  spirit.  Now  apply 
this,  whenever  the  body  and  the  spirit  are  separated  from 
each  other,  excepting  in  a  figure,  then  both  body  and 
spirit  are  without  life.  We  draw  this  conclusion,  thai 
wherever  body  and  spirit  are  spoken  of  as  separately 
acting,  it  is  a  figure ;  that  when  they  are  separated  in 
reality,  the  man,  in  all  his  parts,  is  dead  ;  and  whenever 
the  personal  pronouns  are  used,  they  invariably  apply  to 
all  that  constitutes  the  personality  of  the  man.  If  it  be 
necessary  to  quote  in  confirmation  of  such  self  evident 
deductions,  we  refer  to  2  Cor.  10:  1,  "  Now  ^ /,'  Paul 
myse/j]  beseech  you."  Eom.  7  :  25,  "  So  then  with  the 
mind  '/  inyselj\^  serve  the  law  of  God  ;  but  with  the 
flesh,  the  law  of  sin."  I  have  but  little  doubt  that  spirit 
should  occupy  the  place  of  mind  ;  though  Grriesbach  has 
thrown  spirit  into  the  margin,  because,  I  suppose,  he 
could  not  understand  the  verse  !  Here  we  find  Paul,  the 
identical  "  /  myself ^"^  using  both  his  spirit  and  his  Jiesh 
for  different  purposes.  You  may  likewise  consult  Phil. 
2:  24  ;  Gal.  5:2;  Eph.  3:4;  1  Thess.  2  :  18  ;  Phil. 
19.  Thus  we  see,  it  was  Paul  himself  that  desired  to  be 
with  Christ ;  in  his  own  proper  personality.  And  so  do 
/  desire  to  depart  from  this  corruptible  state,  and  to  be 
with  Christ  in  his  kingdom.  And  I  trust  I  can  say  with 
Paul,  Henceforth  there  is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of 
righteousness,  which  the  Lord,  the  righteous  judge,  shall 
give  me  at  that  day  :  and  not  to  me  only,  but  unto  all 
those  also  who  love  his  appearing.^''  Just  read  2  Cor. 
11 :  22-25,  and  Phil.  3:11,  and  substitute  '  my  spiriV 
for  7,  and  see  how  it  appears. 

Some  have  supposed  that  Paul  desired  to  depart  in  his 
proper  person,  the  same  as  did  Enoch  in  the  antediluvian 
age,  and  as  did  Elijah  in  tiie  age  preceding  the  coming  of 


144  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

Christ ;  and  Paul  might  have  thought  that  another  prac- 
tical example  of  the  design  of  God  to  bestow  perpetuity 
of  life,  would  not  be  unsuitable  in  the  gospel  age.  But 
God  has  given  us  a  more  suitable  example  of  unending 
life,  in  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead ; 
that  being  the  identical  kind  of  unending  Hfe  promised  in 
the  gospel ;  a  life  proceeding  from  an  incorruptible  na- 
ture. If  Paul  entertained  such  a  desire  it  was  perfectly 
natural  and  even  innocent.  For  there  are  few  persons, 
whose  theology  has  not  been  vitiated,  who  do  not  con- 
sider death  as  a  curse  and  a  terror,  and  who  would  desire 
'  to  avoid  it,  and  to  be  translated  and  changed  "  in  tlie 
twinkling  of  an  eye."  But  Paul  did  not  expect  this,  till 
Christ  left  his  Father's  throne  and  assumed  his  owu 
throne,  even  the  throne  of  his  father  David.  For  he 
knew  that  no  man  could  enter  "  the  holy  place  not  made 
with  hands,"  but  the  great  High  Priest,  Christ  Jesus. 
He  knew,^  too,  that  before  he  could  be  with  Christ  he 
^'  must  be  born  again  ;"  and  experience  2i physical  change 
in  the  constitution  of  his  nature — that  he  must  first  part 
with  his  present  mode  of  existence,  before  he  could  pos- 
sibly assume  another,  or  "  be  bom  again"  from  the  dead. 
Still  we  hope  our  opponents  will  perceive  that  there  are 
various  ways  in  which  Paul  could  "  desire  to  depart," 
without  adopting  their  untenable  and  contradictory  in- 
ference that  Paul  desired  to  depart  as  a  disembodied 
spirit,  while  his  body,  to  which  the  personality  attaches, 
was  corrupting  in  the  grave  !  ! 

After  dwelling  so  long  upon  this  celebrated  text  to  de- 
monstrate that  it  does  not  mean  what  popular  tradition 
supposes,  perhaps  you  will  ask.  What  does  it  mean  ? 
Our  reply  is  that  our  translators  have  corrupted  the  cor- 
ruption of  the  Latin  Vulgate.  The  translation  sanction- 
ed by  Bishop  Hughes,  reads,  "  having  a  desire  to  be  dis- 
solved and  to  be  with  Christ,"  which  "  dissolved''''  our 
translators  have  changed  into  "  depart" ;  and  by  thus 
doing,  they  have  called  forth  this  lengthy  explanation. 
And  as  we  write  for  the  English  reader,  who  cannot  re- 
fer to  the  original,  we  have  shown  that  the  text  corrupt- 
ed as  it  is,  is  yet  susceptible  of  a  consistent  interpreta- 
tion ;  and  even  as  it  stands,  it  gives  not  the  least  color 
to  the  monstrous  inference,  that  some  have  endeavored 


Paul's  destre  to  depart.-  145 

to  deduce  from  it,  that  Paul  could  he  dead  and  alive  at 
the  same  time  ! ! 

Phil.  1  :  23,  appears  as  a  conclusion  from  the  whole  of 
the  paragraph  going  before  from  the  12  v.  The  words 
and  even  verses  are  transposed  in  some  of  the  M88. 
8ome  would  read  the  verses  in  this  order — 12,  13,  14, 
15,  17,  16,  18,  19,  20,  22,  21,  23,  and  24.  There  will  be 
a  difference  of  opinion  respecting  the  meaning  of  only 
three  words  of  the  original,  gar,  de,  and  una-lusia ; 
though  some  may  differ  in  the  construction  of  eis.  We 
<5onsider  this  a  fair  translation  of  the  23  v,  "I  am  per- 
plexed which  of  the  two  to  choose,  life  or  death  ;  but  I 
have  an  earnest  desire  respecting  the  returning  and  being 
with  Christ,  which  is  greatly  to  be  preferred,"  fto  either 
life  or  death].  The  next  verse  is  equal  to  the  idea  :  "  But 
that  this  returning  of  Christ  should  be  deferred,  and  your 
probation  lengthened,  is  more  needful  for  you."  Ana- 
iusia,  which  we  translate,  the  retur^tmg^  and  refer  it  to 
Christ,  is  from  aiia-luo: anay'^\gm^Q^  again,  luo,  to  loose, 
to  loose  again.  This  word  cannot  receive  any  secondary 
meaning  that  is  at  variance  with  its  radical  import.  Ana 
involves  the  idea  of  repetition,  and  we  ask  the  candid 
reader,  Had  Paul  ever  been  loosed  before,  m  the  sense 
of  dying,  so  that  he  could  be  loosed  again  in  the  same 
manner  as  at  first  ?  That  is,  die  again  a  second  death. 
If  you  say  nay,  then  we  say  that  Paul  could  not  possibly 
refer  this  word  to  himself,  but  referred  it  to  the  person 
«poken  of,  in  the  very  next  word  but  one,  as  it  occurs  in 
the  Greek  text.  He  earnestly  desired  the  analusia  and 
with  Christ  to  be ;  that  is,  he  wrote  of  the  loosing  again 
of  Christ  If  Paul  had  not  intended  to  -convey  the  idea 
of  repetition,  he  w<^uld  have  used  the  word  lusia, — the 
loosing, — without  the  ana.  Luo  occurs  forty -three  times 
in  the  N.  T.,  and  it  is  nof  once  translated  depart,  but 
thirty  times  to  loose,  and  loose  would  not  be  improper  in 
most  of  the  others.  A  good  example  of  luo  contrasted 
with  bound,  occurs  in  1  €or.  7  :  22  :  ^^  Art  thou  bound 
to  thy  husbaad  ?  seek  not  to  be  loosed.'^'*  The  reader  may 
■find  the  word  several  times  repeated  Mark  1 1  :  2-5. 

Homer  applies  the  word  ana-luo  to  the  loosing  again 
•of  the  cables  of  a  ship,  in  order  to  sail  from  a  port.  See 
Odyss.  IX.,  line  178  ;  XL  line  636 ;  XII.  line  145;  XV. 
line  547.     So  Sophoc.  Elect  142,  applies  ana-luo,  to  the 


146  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITIOTT, 

setting  out  on  a  voyage,  viz.,  by  loosing  again  the  cablei^ 
or  weighing  anchor ;  also,  a  journey.  Westein  shows 
that  it  is  used  in  the  Greek  writers  lor  returning,  or  de- 
partingfrom  a  supper,  and  from  a  banquet,  hence  the 
word  is  used-  in  a  secondary  sense  for  a  departing  again^ 
returning,  coming  back,  untieing,  unravelling.  The 
noun  analusis^  from  the  verb  ana-luo^  from  which 
we  get  our  English  word  analysis^  besides  embracing 
the  meaning  of  the  verb,  a  separation  again  of  something 
bound  or  compounded*,  division  again,  dissolution.  But 
never  departure  in  the  sense  of  dying;  but  departure 
in  the  sense  of  departing  from  a  place  oji  a  journey.  In 
2  Tim.  4:6,  "  The  time  of  my  analusis  is  at  hand."  This 
loosing  again  evidently  implies  dissolution^  and  so  it  m 
properly  rendered  in  the  Yulgate,  but  is  corrupted  into 
departure  in  our  translation.  We  regret  exceedingly^ 
that  the  word  analusia,  in  its  compound  verbal  form,  oc- 
curs but  in  one  other  place  in  the  N.  T.  But  that  one 
case,  fortunately  for  the  cause  of  truth,  is  exactly  to  the 
point,  and  refers  to  the  identical  circumstance  that  Paul 
refers  to  in  Phil.  1  :  23,  viz  r  The  setting  out  of  Christ 
from  heaven  to  take  possession  of  his  kingdom.  In  Luke 
19  :  12,  Christ  said,  "  A  certain  nobleman  went  into  a 
far  country  to  receive  for  himself  the  sovereignty,  [Syriac 
to  obtain  royalty]  and  to  return.^'  The  sovereign  of  Ju?- 
dea  had  to  go  to  Eome  to  "  receive'^  i\\Q  sovereignty ^  be- 
fore he  returned  to  exercise  it  at  home,  not  a  distant  king- 
dom as  the  common  version  makes  it  appear.  And  Christ 
is  now  sitting  upon  his  Father's  throne  till  he  be  invested 
with  the  sovereignty  of  his  own  kingdom,  the  kingdom 
of  his  father  David-  To  his  return  from  heaven  there  i» 
frequent  allusion  in  Scripture.  Luke  12  :  35,  ^^  Let  your 
loins  be  girded  about,  and  your  lights  be  burning;  and 
ye  yourselves  like  unto  men  that  maitfor  their  lord — -pote 
ana-lusei  ek  ton  gamon^ — translated  "^  "When  he  shall  re* 
turn  from  %\\q  wedding."  Here,  in  allusion  to- the  very 
same  fact  th^t  Paul  earnestly  desired,  the  word  ana-lusei 
occurs  ;  and  it  is  translated  '^  return."  So  ana-lusai 
in  our  text,  means  the  loosing  again-,  or  the  "  returning^'* 
of  Christ  from  heaven  again. 

We  trust  that  every  cawdid  reader  will  acknowledge 
that  Paul  must  refer  the  ana-lusiw — the  loosing  again — 
to  Christ,  to  whom  the  word  is  applicable,  and  a  thing 


Paul's  desire  to  depart.  147 

to  be  earnestly  desired,  and  not  to  himself,  to  whom  the 
word  cannot  be  applicable,  as  it  would  be  making  Paul 
say,^^  That  it  was  very  difficult  for  him  to  decide  which 
of  two  things,  hfe  or  death,  he  should  most  desire,  and 
in  the  same  breath  declaring  that  he  earnestly  desired 
one  of  the  two,  namely,  death,  which  was  far  better  than 
the  other  one,  which  at  the  same  time  could  not  be  made 
the  object  of  his  choice,  because  the  comparative  advan- 
tages of  each,  of  life  and  death,  were  so  nearly  balanced  ! !  I 


148 


CHAPTEE  IX. 


INTERMEDIATE  STATE  CONTINXTED, 

We  shall  very  much  augment  the  strength  of  our  ar- 
gument respecting  the  "  intermediate  state,"  and  immor- 
tality, by  pointing  out  the  locality  of  the  residence  of  the 
immortalized  saints,  as  well  as  by  showing  that  the  pre- 
sent residence  of  the  dead  saints  is  in  sheol^  usually  trans- 
lated hell^  though  sometimes  the  grave  and  the  pit. 

Dan.  2d  c,  Nebuchadnezzar  saw  a  great  image  repre- 
senting successive  kingdoms  located  on  this  earth,  end- 
ing with  a  divided  state  of  the  kingdoms,  into  ten  parts 
or  kingdoms.  44  v.,  "  And  in  the  days  of  these  kings 
shall  the  God  of  heaven  set  up  a  kingdom,  which  shall 
never  be  destroyed."  As  the  other  kingdoms  were  located 
upon  this  earth,  so  will  this  be.  When  Christ  hath  sub- 
dued the  nations,  then  will  the  great  voices  be  heard, 
saying,  ''The  kingdoms  of  ^^^5  -w^or/Shave  become  the  king- 
doms of  our  Lord,  and  of  his  Christ ;  and  he  shall  reign 
for  ever  and  ever."  Eev.  11 :  15. 

NEW   JERUSALEM. 

Gal.  4 :  26. — ''  But  Jerusalem  which  is  above,  is  free, 
which  is  the  mother  of  us  all."  Phil.  3  :  20. — "  For  our 
citizenship  is  enrolled  in  heaven,  from  whence  also  we 
look  for  the  Savior,"  &c.  Heb.  12  :  22,  23.—"  But  ye 
are  coming  to  Mount  Zion,  and  unto  the  city  of  the  liv- 
ing God,  the  heavenly  Jerusalem — to  the  general  assem- 
bly of  the  first-born,  which  are  written  in  heaven^  11 : 
16,  "  But  now  they  desire  abetter  country,  that  is  a  hea- 
venly :  wherefore  God  is  not  ashamed  to  be  called  their 


LOCALITY  OF  SAINTS  INHERITANCE.  149 

God  :  for  he  hath  prepared  for  them  a  city."  Eev.  21 : 
1,  2,  And  I,  John,  saw  the  holy  city,  New  Jerusalem, 
coming  down  from  God  out  of  heaven." 

The  Jerusalem  here  alluded  to  does  not  exist  in  hea- 
ven, but  is  above  old  Jerusalem  in  rank  and  privileges, 
as  the  margin  of  the  previous  verse  testifies.  Indeed,  she 
now  only  exists  in  the  vision  of  the  prophets,  and  in  the 
faith  of  beUevers ;  but  she  will  be  created  on,  and 
help  to  glorify  the  new  earth.  Isa.  65  :  17-19,  "  For  be- 
hold I  create  new  heavens  and  a  new  earth  :  and  the 
former  shall  not  be  remembered,  nor  come  into  mind  ;" 
[on  account  of  the  excellency  of  the  latter].  "  But  be 
ye  glad  and  rejoice  for  ever  in  that  which  I  create  ;  for 
behold  I  create  Jerusalem  a  rejoicing,  and  her  people  a 
joy.  And  I  will  rejoice  in  Jerusalem,  and  joy  in  my 
people."  When  that  period  arrives,  God  will  create  Je- 
rusalem, as  well  as  the  new  earth,  as  Isa.  33:  17-24; 
65  :  17-22  ;  Eev.  21  :  4;  all  declare.  There  is  a  necessity 
for  a  new  heavens  and  new  earth,  because,  (I,)  the  pre- 
sent heaven  (the  atmosphere),  and  perhaps  the  present 
earth — ''  between  the  river  of  Egypt  and  the  great  river 
Euphrates,"  excepted — are  to  be  burned.  See  Deut. 
32:22;  Isa.  24  :  19,  20  ;  34:4;  51:6;  Mic.  1:4;2 
Pet.  3  :  10-12;  Eev.  20  :  11 ;  21  :  1-5.  Because,  (2,) 
God  has  promised  to  create  a  new  atmosphere,  and  a 
new  earth,  as  the  same  Scriptures  or  contexts  all  declare. 
And  because,  (3,)  God  has  promised  to  restore  all  the 
waste  places  which  are  now  in  ruins  :  See  Jer.  48  :  47 ; 
49  :  6-39  ;  Ezk.  16 :  55  ;  compare  v.  46  with  61 ;  Isa.  14 : 
7 ;  Acts  3:21;  1  Tim.  6:13.  Because,  (4,)  the  promise 
made  to  Abraham  and  his  righteous  seed,  includes  the 
new  heavens  and  new  earth.  See  Gen.  13  :  14,  15  ;  17  : 
8  ;  22 :  17  ;  compare  Eom.  4:13;  Acts  7:5;  Heb.  1 1 : 
8-14,  with  Gen.  12:4;  13  :  6  ;  25  :  7  ;  Isa.  33  :  17  ;  Exo. 
6  :  4.  Because,  (5,)  All  the  righteous  of  every  clime  are 
heirs  of  the  same  new  earth  with  their  father  Abraham. 
See  Gal.  3  :  29  ;  Ps.  37  :  3-34  ;  Prov.  2 :  21,  22 ;  Is.  bl : 
13 ;  60  :  21 ;  Dan.  7  :  18-27  ;  Mat.  ^\b\  Acts  26  :  6-8 ; 
Eev.  5  :  10.  The  wicked  possess  the  present  earth,  and 
rule  in  every  nation.  Job  9  :  24,  The  earth  is  given  into 
the  hands  of  the  wicked.  Compare  with  Prov.  10  :  30, 
The  wicked  shall  not  inhabit  the  earth:  which  texts  can 
only  be  reconciled  by  the  creation  of  a  new  earth.     Cora- 


J  50  BIBLE  VS.   TRADITION. 

pare  alsoPs.  73:3-12 ;  Mat.  6: 19  ;  John  15: 19;  1  John  2: 

1 5.  Because,  (6,)  Christ  has  the  promise  of  the  new  earth. 
See  Ps.  2 :  7-9  ;  72  :  8,  10 ;  Dan.  7:  14-27 ;  and  Christ  dis. 
owns  this  earth  for  his  kingdom.  John  18:  36;  Mat. 
8  :  20  ;  2  Tim.  4 :  1.  Because,  (7,)  the  present  Mount 
Zion  will  be  the  capital,  the  seat  of  government  in  the 
new  world.  See  Psa.  132  :  13, 14  ;  Isa.  24  :  23  ;  35  :  10  ; 
59  :  20  ;  Ezk.  37  :  12  ;  Mic.  4:7;  Ps.  72 :  6,  8 ;  Kev.  21 : 
1,  3,  9,  10.  And,  because,  (8,)  Christ  is  to  sit  upon  the 
throne  of  his  father  David,  in  Mount  Zion,  and  to 
reign  there  as  King  for  ever.  See  Luke  1  :  31,  33  ;  24  : 
39;  Eph.5:30;  Acts  1:11;  Ps.  132:11;  89:35-37; 
Isa.  9  :  6,  7 ;  Ezk.  21  :  25-27 :  Ps.  50 :  2. 

JNow  as  the  city.  New  Jerusalem,  will  be  placed  upon 
Mount  Zion,  the  very  place  on  the  new  earth  where  old 
Jerusalem  stood,  and  there  also  will  Christ  reign  on  Da- 
vid's throne,  this  city,  New  Jerusalem,  does  not  at  pre- 
sent exist.  Before  John  saw  her  "  coming  down  from 
God  out  of  heaven,"  he  saw  the  new  earth  created  and 
ready  to  receive  her.  Kev.  21  :  1,2.  And  before  she  was 
seen  in  reality  in  the  heavens,  or  in  the  atmosphere,  Paul 
saw  her  created.  That  is,  he  saw  the  citizens  of  the  New 
Jerusalem  raised  from  the  dead,  and  "  caught  up  in  the 
clouds  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air."  See  1  Thess.  4  : 
16,  17.  Then  we  infer  that  the  New  Jerusalem  is  the 
church  of  the  first  born  from  the  deadj  and  is  composed 
of  all  "  the  spirits,"  that  is  all  the  persons,  "  of  the  just 
men  made  perfect"  in  their  incorruptible  or  resurrection 
state  ;  of  those  mortal  persons  who,  when  they  rise  from 
the  dead,  "  will  put  on  incorruption"  and  "  immortahty.'' 
They  cannot  be  made  perfect,  in  the  New  Jerusalem 
sense,  till  "  that  which  is  perfect  is  come,"  and  our  cor- 
ruptible natures  "  clothed  upon"  with  our  incorruptible 
matures,  and  till  "  mortality  shall  be  swallowed  up  of 
life"  everlasting.  2  Cor.  5 :  4.  We  conceive,  therefore, 
that  Paul's  New  Jerusalem  was  the  church  in  her  resur- 
rection state  which  will  be  planted  on  Mount  Zion,  the 
city  of  the  hving  God. 

Strongly  confirmatory  of  this  are  the  passages  found 
in  John  3  c. ;  1  Thess.  4  c. ;  Heb.  12c.;  Jude,  and 
Zech.,  by  which  the  progress  of  the  first-bom  church  can 
be  traced.  1.  They  are  redeemed,  bought  back  from 
corruption  and  the  grave  by  the  blood  of  Christ.     For 


LOCATION  OF  saints'*  INHERTTANCE.  151 

observe,  Paul  is  speaking  of  the  church  in  ber  perfected 
or  resurrection  state  on  the  new  earth,  when  all  her  mem- 
bers will  be  made  perfect.  This  perfect  state  of  the 
<;hurch  was  often  seen  in  vision  as  though  it  already  ex- 
isted, nevertheless  it  is  yet  in  the  future.  Observe,  Paul 
does  NOT  say  that  the  innumerable  company  is  in  heaven, 
but  only  that  they  are  written,  or  enrolled  in  heaven : 
Heb.  12:  23.  The  Phillipians  living  upon  tJie  earth — 
whom  Pa^l  contrasts  with  the  apostates,  the  enemies  of 
the  cross  of  Christ,  wbo  were  minding  earthly  things,  ^nd 
who  likewise  were  living  mith  them  upon  the  earth — con- 
.stituted  a  part  oi  this  innumerable  company,  and  himself 
likewise  as  one  of  them,  Phil.  3  :  20,  "  For  our  citizen- 
ship (of  the  New  Jerusalem)  is  enrolled  in  heaven ;  from 
-whence  ^Iso  we  lool<:  lor  the  Savior,  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ ;  who  shall  change  our  vile  bodies,  that  they  may 
be  fashioned  like  unto  his  most  glorious  body,  according 
to  the  working  whereby  he  is  able  even  to  subdue  all 
things  unto  himself"  And  although  their  names  were 
enrolled  as  citizens  of  the  New  Jerusalem,  in  the  Lamb's 
book  of  life,  they  might  be  "  blotted  out"  therefrom ;  and 
exhorting  them,  he  says,  "Therefore,  my  brethren,  dear 
ly  beloved  and  longed  for,  my  joy  and  crown,  so  stand 
fast  in  the  Lord  my  dearly  beloved."  And  as  the  spirits, 
.or  minds,  of  these  persons  were  purified  by  the  belief  of 
the  truth,  Paul  calls  these  persons,  then  dwelling  upon 
the  earth,  associated  with  all  the  other  citizens  of  the 
^ame  country,  "  who  looked  for  a  city  which  hath  founda- 
tions, whose  Builder  and  Maker  is  God.* "whether  living 
then,  or  in  their  graves,  or  y^t  to  live  upon  the  earth  ;  be- 
tcause  -their  spirits  or  minds  were  to  be  sanctified  by  the 
truth^  he  calls  these  persons  "  spirits  ;"  and  likewise  be- 
eause  they  will  have  a  spiritual  natura     Titus  3:5- 

It  is  a  common  practice  of  a;ll  .the  propbets  to  speak  of 
future  events  as  though  present^  and  sometimes  even  as 
though  they  were  past.  See  Isa.  53 :  5,  and  Rev.  13  : 
18.  Because  all  things  past,  present,  and  to  come,  are 
naked  and  open  unto  the  eyes  of  him  with  whom  we 
have  to  do,  he  often  calleth  those  things  that  be  not  as 
though  they  were.     S.ee  Heb.  4  :  13,  and  Eom.  4  :  17, 

The  kingdom  of  heaven  properly  means  the  reign  of 
beaven,  and  is  so  translated  in  many  versions.  The  reign 
o£  keaven  will  truly  commence  when  all  earthly  thrones 


152  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION, 

are  cast  down.  This  kingdom  is  not  ahove^  nor  in  hea- 
ven ;  but  launder  the  whole  heaven  :  See  Dan.  7 :  14,  18, 
27.  "  Whosoever  therefore  shall  humble  himself  as  this 
little  child,  the  same  is  greatest  in  the  reign  of  heaven."" 
"  Suffer  the  little  children  to  come  unto  me,....for  of  sucb 
is  the  reign  of  heaven  :"  Mat,  18  :  4  f  19  :  14.  "  He  that 
is  least  in  the  reign  of  heaven"  (when  all  are  made  per- 
fect in  the  new  earth)  "  is  greater  than  John/'  (the  bap- 
tist in  his  imperfect  state).  Mat,  11  :  IL  But  this  i» 
speaking  of  the  resurrection  state  as  though  it  were  pre- 
sent. It  is  in  this  sense  that  God  calls  himself  a  God  not 
of  the  dead,  but  of  the  hving,  for  all  his  saints  live  unto 
him  ;  Luke  20  :  27-40.  The  dead  saints^  although  their 
"thoughts  have  perishedy"^  and  they  "know  not  any- 
thing;" though  they  are  dead  to  themselves  and  to  all 
others ;  yet  they  are  alive  in  the  purpose  and  in  the 
vision  of  God.  The  object  of  Jesus  in  his  address  to  the* 
Sadducees  was  to  prove  that  there  would  be  a  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead.  Mark,  God  is  not  the  God  of  the- 
wicked  dead  ;  but  of  living  saints,,  and  Christ  argue» 
that  this  saying  of  God  to  Moses,  proves  that  there  will 
be  -a  resurrection  of  Abraham,  of  Isaac,  and  of  Jacob^ 
and  consequently  of  all  the  righteous.  But  if  Abraham, 
Isaac,  and  Jacob,  had  been  actually  Hving  at  that  time,, 
then  God  would  have  been  the  God  of  the  Hving  without 
a  resurrection^  and  the  argument  of  our  Savior  was  a 
failure.  But  as  he  triumphantly  silenced  the  Sadducees,. 
and  convinced  them  that  their  favored  prophet  really 
taught  a  resurrection  in  these  words ;  then  Abraham^ 
Isaac,  and  Jacob,  are  dead  and  unconscious,  and  are  de- 
pendent upon  the  resurrection  for  all  future  life,  and 
must  be  raised  again  from  the  dead  before  they  can  live- 
Thus  taught  Christ — and  thus  taught  all  the  Apostles. 
The  future  Hfe  is  dependent  upon  a  resurrection  from 
the  dead.  But  although  these  live  to  God,  or  in  his  pur- 
pose, yet  is  it  true  as  Paul  says,  if  the  dead  rise  not, 
then  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  and  aU  the  saints  be- 
fore Christ's  time,,  have  already  perished.  They  '  must 
be  born  again'  from  the  dead  '  before  they  can  enter  the 
kingdom  of  heaven ;'  and  they  cannot  be  born  again,  till 
they  have  parted  with  their  original  conscious  existence. 
This  future  life,  the  portion  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Ja- 
cob, is  "  hid  with  Christ  in  God>  and  when  Christ  who 


THE  TIME   OP  THE  INHERITANCE.  153 

is  their  life,  shall  appear"  "  again,  a  second  time,  without 
a  sin  offering  unto  salvation,"  "  then  shall"  Abraham, 
Isaac,  and  Jacob,  "  appear  in  glory  with  him."  See 
Heb.  13:20;  1  Thess.  4:  14;  Col.  3:3.  If  the  Sad- 
ducees  had  believed  that  Christ  taught  that  the  dead 
patriarchs  were  actually  alive  in  another  world,  they 
would  have  only  altered  their  question,  from,  "  There- 
fore, in  the  resurrection^  whose  wife  of  them  is  she  ?  for 
seven  had  her  to  wife  ;"  unto,  "  Whose  wife  is  she  now 
in  the  other  world  ?"  But  listen  to  the  answer  of  Jesus. 
"  The  children  of  this  age  marry,  and  are  given  in  mar- 
riage :  but  those  that  shall  be  esteemed  worthy  to  obtain 
that  age  and  the  resurrection  (tees  ek  nekron)  that  out 
from  among  the  dead  ones,  neither  marry  nor  are  given 
in  marriage :  neither  can  they  die  any  more  :  for  they  are 
equal  unto  the  angels  ;  and  are  the  children  of  God,  be- 
ing the  children  of  the  resurrection  :"  [And  Moses  in 
effect  shewed  you  this  doctrine  at  the  bush.] 

If  there  be  a  hngering  doubt  as  to  the  unconsciousness 
of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  read  Gen.  25  :  8  ;  35  :  29, 
and  43,  where  a  full  account  is  presented  of  the  death 
and  burial  of  these  holy  men,  and  not  the  least  hint  that 
any  part  of  them  ever  went  to  heaven.  (See  our  remarks 
on  these  passages,  in  another  chapter.)  Read  1  Kings 
2 :  10,  "  David  slept  with  his  fathers,  and  was  buried  in 
the  city  of  David."  As  this  was  a  man  of  God,  we  ask, 
Did  he  sleep  with  his  living  fathers  in  heaven  ?  What 
means  Peter,  Acts  2  :  34,  "  For  David  is  not  ascended 
into  the  heavens."  Here  we  must  contend  that  the  liv- 
ing, the  thinking,  the  immortal  part,  if  David  had  such  a 
part,  would  be  called  David ;  and  not  what  some  affect 
to  contend  as  merely  the  outside  shell :  and  it  is  that 
David,  the  essential  part,  call  it  by  what  name  you 
please,  that  is  now  sleeping  with  his  fathers.  Eead  Zech. 
1:5,"  Your  fathers,  where  are  they  ?  and  the  pro- 
phets, do  they  live  for  ever  ?"  Would  God  ask  such 
questions  as  these,  if  he  knew  that  they  were  all 
alive  in  heaven  ?  The  Jews  said  to  Christ,  John  8 : 
52,  "  Abraham  is  dead,  and  the  prophets  (are  dead).'' 
They  then  did  not  believe  they  were  alive  in  heaven. 
But  if  such  were  not  the  fact,  we  should  have  expected 
Christ  to  have  countenanced  the  popular  dogma,  and 
have  rephed,  "  Truly  the  bodies  of  Abraham  and  the 


154  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

prophets  are  dead ;  but  their  souls  are  alive  and  rejoicing 
in  heaven"  !!!  But  this  separate  conscious  existence  of 
the  soul  is  of  human,  and  not  of  divine  origin. 

THE    THIRD    HEAVEN. 

2  Cor.  12  :  2,  "  I  knew  a  man  in  Christ  above  fourteen 
years  ago,  (whether  in  the  body,  I  cannot  tell ;  or 
whether  out  of  the  body,  I  cannot  tell :  God  knoweth,) 
such  an  one  caught  up  to  the  third  heaven.  And  I  knew 
such  a  man  (whether  in  the  body,  or  out  of  the  body,  I 
cannot  tell  :  God  knoweth,)  how  that  he  was  caught  up 
into  paradise,  and  heard  unspeakable  words,  which  it  is 
not  lawful  for  a  man  to  utter." 

Will  an  objector  say,  that  the  above  passage  implies 
that  Paul  was  caught  up  to  the  third  heaven  or  paradise, 
either  as  a  separate  conscious  spirit,  or  bodily,  in  his 
whole  person  ?  and  that  the  first  supposition  proves  the 
possibility  of  the  separate  conscious  existence  of  the 
spirit ;  and  that  both  suppositions  imply  the  existence  of 
the  third  heaven  or  paradise  at  that  time  ?  We  reply, 
first — The  original  text  does  not  say  that  Paul  was 
caught  up  ;  the  little  word  up^  is  a  gloss  of  the  transla- 
tors, and  expresses  merely  their  opinion.  As  the  word 
eis  implies  motion  towards  a  place,  if  it  were  first  proved 
that  paradise  was  upwards,  then  the  word  would  have 
been  admissible.  *'  That  he  was  snatched  away  to  para- 
dise," seems  to  be  the  sense.  Secondly — Paul's  expres- 
sion, "  Whether  in  the  body  or  out  of  the  body,"  seems  to 
imply  that  Paul  did  not  know  whether  his  nature,  con- 
stitution, or  person — which  we  have  shown  Paul  often 
calls  his  body — whether  this  nature,  or  body,  was  changed 
from  a  corruptible  to  an  incorruptible  state,  to  enable 
him  fully  to  appreciate  the  enjoyments  of  paradise,  fox 
flesh  and  blood,  and  pain  were  unfit  for,  and  could  hard- 
ly realize  the  scenery  and  enjoyments  of  paradise. 
Fourthly — we  reply,  that  the  whole  afifair  was  evidently 
a  vision,  and  such  Paul  declares  it  to  be  in  verse  1,  "  I 
will  come  to  visions  and  revelations  of  the  Lord."  In 
the  same  sense,  John  saw  the  same  things,  the  new  hea- 
vens and  the  new  earth,  as  well  as  a  progressive  course 
of  events  running  through  thousands  of  years,  prior  to 
%]\Q  preation  of  the  new  heavens  and  the  new  earth,  and 


THE  THIRD   HEAVES.  155 

the  restoration  of  paradise — that  is,  a  garden  of  delights 
— therein.  The  prophets  saw  many  things  in  vision, 
which  did  not  actually  exist  till  thousands  of  years  after. 
Peter  plainly  explains  the  nature  of  this  third  heaven, 
and  also  when  it  will  exist.  He  assures  us  {2  Pet.  S:  5) 
that  the  Jirst  heavens  (or  atmospheres)  and  earth,  being 
overflowed  with  water,  perished  ;  The  second  heavens  (or 
atmospheres)  and  earth,  which  are  now,  (and  of  course 
distinguished  from  the  Jirst  and  third  in  point  of  time,) 
are  kept  in  store  reserved  unto  fire  against  a  day  of  judg 
ment  and  perdition  of  ungodly  men.  Of  this  second 
heavens  and  earth  he  says :  "  In  the  day  of  the  Lord,  the 
heavens  (or  atmospheres)  shall  pass  away  with  a  great 
noise,  and  the  elements  shall  melt  with  fervent  heat,  the 
-earth  also,  and  the  works  that  are  therein,  will  be  dis- 
covered, (kad  ge,  kai  ta  en  autl  ergo.,  eurethesetai,  Vati- 
can MB,,)  rtxA  katakalsjtai, '  be  burned  up.'  The  third 
heavens,  Peter  points  out  in  the  13  v,  "  Nevertheless  we, 
according  to  his  promise,  look  for  new  heavens  and  a  new 
earth,  wherein  dwelleth  justification." 

This  same  third  heavens  was  seen  in  vision  by  John. 
Rev.  21  :  1,  "  And  I  saw  a  new  heaven  and  a  new  earth : 
for  the  first  heaven  and  the  first  earth  were  passed  away ; 
and  there  w^as  no  more  sea.  And  I  John  saw  the  holy 
city,  new  Jerusalem,  coming  down  from  God  out  of  hea- 
ven." Rev.  2 :  7,  "To  him  that  overcometh  will  I  give 
to  eat  of  the  tree  of  life,  which  is  in  the  midst  of  the 
paradise  of  God,"  This  third  heaven  is  adverted  to  by 
Paul,  Heb.  2:5,  It  was  foreseen  and  hailed  by  the 
patriarch  Abraham  as  his  "  paternal  country."  Heb. 
11  :  14,  16  ;  and  in  it  will  be  the  ^  city  of  the  living  God.' 
Heb.  12  •  22.  The  everlasting  habitation  of  those  who 
shall  attain  unto  the  first  resurrection.  Rev,  21  :  7,  "To 
him  that  overcometh  I  will  give  these  things."  DosO 
auto  tauta^  Vatican  and  Moscow.  The  careful  reader 
wall  perceive  that  the  tree  of  hfe  is  to  be  in  the  new  earth, 
and  paradise  likewise  will  be  in  the  new  earth,  and  the 
third  heavens  is  likewise  to  be  associated  with  paradise 
in  the  new  earth,  all  in  the  future,  and  will  not  be  actual- 
ly in  existence  till  the  Lord  shall  "  send  Jesus  Christ, 
who  was  before  appointed  for  you  ;  whom  the  heavens 
must  retain  until  the  times  of  the  restoring  of  all  things 
that  God  has  spoken  of  by  the  mouth  of  his  holy  pro- 


156  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITiaW. 

phets  since  the  world  began,"  It  follows,  therefore, 
from  the  foregoing,  that  Paul  could  only  be  snatched  to 
paradise  in  vision^  and  the  trance  or  extasy  was  so 
powerful,  and  appeared  so  real  that,  at  the  time,  he  could 
not  tell  whether  he  was  changed  from  his  body  of  cor- 
ruption to  incorruption ;  and  in  this  state  he  saw  the 
glories  of  the  coming  paradise,  and  afterwards  changed 
back  again  as  before,  or  whether  he  had  seen  these  things 
without  experiencing  such  a  change.  Paul  had  no  idea 
that  his  ghost  was  caught  away  from  his  body,  for  he 
knew  that  ^'  the  body  without  the  spirit  is  dead."  Sure- 
ly if  Paul  had  been  dead  and  restored  to  life  again,  he 
would  have  known  it.  It  was  no  unusual  thing  for  Paul 
and  others  to  use  the  words  body  and  flesh  to  denote  a 
state  of  corruption  and  mortality.  See  Phil.  3:21;  1 
Cor.  15  :  50 ;  Gal.  2  :  20  ;  Heb.  2 :  14  ;  Eom.  7  :  24;  Ps. 
56:  4  ;  78  :  39  ;  Isa.  40  :  6  ;  Jer.  17  :  5  ;  Dan.  2  :  11  ;  2 
Cor.  12  :  2  ;  Phil.  1 :  22,  24  ;  Heb.  13  :  3,  compared  with 
Exo.  21 :  3.  "  If  thou  buy  a  Hebrew  servant,  six  years 
shall  he  serve  :  and  in  the  seventh  he  shall  go  out  free 
for  nothing.  If  he  came  in  with  his  body  [only,]  he  shall 
go  out  with  his  body  [only :]  if  he  were  married,  then 
his  wife  shall  go  out  with  him."  (Margin.)  Body  is 
here  rendered  himself:  Body  and  self  then  are  synono- 
mous  expressions.  When  in  2  Cor.  5 :  8,  Paul  says, 
"  While  we  are  at  home  in  the  body  we  are  absent  from 
the  Lord  :"  the  we  does  not  mean  an  immortal  ghost,  but 
the  veritable  Paul  himself^  and  all  Christians  themselves, 
who,  while  connected  with  this  corruptible  body  or  na- 
ture, are  necessarily  absent  from  the  Lord.  Now  if  the 
WE  refer  to  the  immortal  ghosts  of  Christians,  because 
WE  are  at  home  in  the  body,  and  we  are  absent  from  the 
Lord,  then  the  we  in  2  Kings  7  :  3,  should  mean  immor- 
tal ghosts  likewise.  "  The  four  leprous  men  said  one  to 
another,  Why  sit  we  (immortal  ghosts)  here  until  we 
die  ?  If  we  say,  we  will  enter  into  the  city,  then  the  fa- 
mine is  in  the  city  and  we  shall  die  there,  and  if  we  sit 
still  here  we  die  also."  We  insist  that  the  same  princi- 
ple of  interpretation  be  carried  out,  and  then  the  we,  the 
immortal  souls  of  these  men  will  die  at  all  events,  and 
thereby  prove  that  they  are  but  mortal  souls  after  all ! 
We  ask  again.  Could  the  jailor  have  killed  himself,  if 
himself  was  an  immortal  ghost  that  could  not  be  killed  ? 


CAUTION   IN   INTERPRETING.  167 

yet  himself  dwelt  in  a  body,  or  rather,  was  a  body.  We 
have  said  sufficient  to  convince  candid  persons  that  we 
must  all  remain  at  home  in  the  body  of  corruption  oi 
mortahty,  whether  that  body  be  dead  or  alive,  until  we 
put  on  incorruption  and  immortality,  at  the  resurrection, 
when  *'  mortality  is  swallowed  up  of  life,"  and  we  "caught 
up  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air,"  thenceforward  to  "  be 
ever  with  the  Lord." 

We  might  also  show  that  body  and  flesh  are  twenty- 
six  times  used  to  represent  a  sinful  state,  so  that  persons 
are  said  to  be  children  of  the  flesh  or  in  an  unconverted 
state,  in  opposition  to  being  children  of  God.  See  Rom. 
6:  6;  9:  8;  I  Cor.  5:  5;  Gal.  5:  19,  24;  Eph.  2:  11  ; 
Col.  2 :  11,  18 ;  1  Pet.  4:2;  Rom.  8:8;  Ezk.  16:  26 ; 
John  1  :  13 ;  Rom.  7:5;  8 :  9,  10;  1  Cor.  10  :  18 ;  2 
Cor.  10:2;  Gal.  4  :  23,  29  ;  Col.  2:13;  1  Pet.  2  :  11  ; 
2  Pet.  2:  10,  18;  and  Jude  23. 

Body  and  flesh  are  thirty-six  times  used  to  distinguish 
the  workings  of  the  animal  nature  or  lower  order  of  fa- 
culties, from  the  workings  of  the  higher  intellectual  and 
moral  faculties,  and  the  working  of  the  Spirit  of  God. 
See  Rom.  4:1;  8  :  4-23  ;  9  :  3,  5  ;  13:14;  1  Cor.  1  : 
26  ;  10  :  18  ;  2  Cor.  1  :  12,  19 ;  10 :  2,  3  ;  11:18;  Gal. 
1:16;  3:3;  4:23,29;  5:13,16,17,19,24;  6:8; 
Eph.  6:5;  2  Pet.  2:  10. 

The  flesh  is  used  sixteen  times  for  mind.  See  Pro  v. 
5:  11,  17;  Ecc.  2:  3;  11:10;  12  :  12;  Jer.  12:  12; 
Ezk.  21:5;  23  :  20  ;  1  Cor.  5:5;  7  :  4,  28 ;  2  Cor.  7 : 
5  ;  Col.  2  :  23. 

Body  is  fifteen  times  used  for  church.  See  Rom.  12  : 
5  ;  1  Cor.  10  :  17 ;  12 :  13,  27  ;  Eph.  1 :  23  ;  2  .  16 ;  3  : 
6;  4:  4,  12,  16;  5  :  23 ;  Col.  1  :  18,  24;  2  :  17 ;  3:  15. 

Having  seen  the  various  ways  in  which  body  and  flesh 
are  used  we  should  be  careful  how  we  draw  an  inference 
from  an  isolated  case  of  the  use  of  the  term  body,  and 
that  inference  should  always  be  repudiated  when  it  con- 
tradicts the  testimony  of  the  word  of  the  Lord,  clearly 
and  plainly  expressed.  If  the  terms  body  and  Jiesh  are 
used  two  hundred  and  six  times  to  signify  the  creature, 
or  person  himself ;  and  fifty  times  to  distinguish  between 
the  desires  of  the  flesh  or  animal  nature,  and  those  of  the 
mind  or  intellectual  nature ;  thirty-six  times  to  distin- 
guish the  will  of  man  from  the  will  of  God ;  sixteen  times 


158  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

to  signify  the  mind  of  the  person ;  and  twenty-six  times 
to  represent  an  unconverted  state  ;  and  the  body  fifteen 
times  used  to  represent  the  church  :  is  it  marvelous  that 
body  and  flesh  should  twenty  times  be  used  to  signify  our 
nature  as  at  present  constituted  ;  or  a  state  of  mortahty 
and  corruption  ?     And  that  in  one  of  these  last  cases,  2 
Cor.  12  c,  the  word  body  can  be  so  perverted  as  to  seem 
to  conform  to  the  notion  of  the  separate  conscious  exis 
tence  of  the  spirit  ?     Is  it  not  rather  more  marvelous, 
that  out  of  the  three  hundred  and  fifty-four  cases  of  the 
anomalous  application  of  the  terms  body  and  flesh,  there 
should  be  only  one  case  that  can  by  any  possibility  be 
made  consistent  with  the  separate  conscious  existence  of 
the  spirit  ?  and  that  one  case  only  when  taken  aivay 
from  its  connection  ?  as  the  context  assures  us  that  we 
cannot  be  "  absent  from  the  body  and  present  with  the 
Lord,  till  mortality  is  swallowed  up  of  life ;"  or  until 
we  are  entirely  deprived  of  all  connection  with  our  pre- 
sent mortal  nature  by  putting  on  incorruption  and  im- 
mortality at  the  resurrection,  or  by  a  change  equivalent 
thereunto  at  that  time.     And  it  is  the  more  astonishing 
that  such  an  inference  should  be  drawn,  because  Paul 
used  the  same  form  of  expression  twice,  namely,  in  1 
Cor.  5  :  3,  and  Col.  2 :  5,  where  he  only  meant  to  express 
the  idea,  that  his  mind  was  with  them  in  sympathy,  while 
his  body,  or  flesh,  or  person,  was  in  a  diflerent  place ! 
Remember,  Paul  was  at  Philippi  when  he  wrote,  "  For 
/  verily,  as  absent  in  body^  but  present  in  spirit^  have 
judged  already,  as  though  I  were  present,  concerning 
him  that  hath  so  done  this  deed."     And  that  Paul  was 
at  Rome,  when  he  wrote  to  the  Colossians,  "  For  though 
/  be  absent  in  the  fleshy  yet  am  I  with  you  in  the  spirit^ 
joying  and  beholding  your  order,  and  the  steadfastness 
of  your  faith  in  Christ."     We  have  just  as  good  a  foun- 
dation for  the  inference,  that  in  these  two  cases,  the  Hv- 
ing  spirit  of  Paul,  as  a  conscious  ghost,  was  separated 
from  his  body,  leaving  it  dead — or  alive  if  you  please — 
in  the  one  case,  the  ghost  at  Corinth,  the  body  at  Phihp- 
pi  ;  and  in  the  other,  that  the  spirit  was  at  Colosse  re- 
joicing there,  while  his  body  was  at  Rome,  as  that  the 
spirit  of  Paul  as  a  living  conscious  being,  and  the  body 
of  Paul,  either  living  or  dead,  could  be  in  two  distinct  and 
distant  places  at  the  same  instant  of  time !!     And  wo 


THE   PENITENT   THIEF's   CASE.  159 

have  the  advantage  of  the  traditionists ;  we  give  him  two 
examples  iox  one  I  And  we  have  this  additional  advan- 
tage, that  our  two  examples  most  clearly  imply,  when 
taken  apart  from  their  context,  and  from  all  correct  no- 
tions of  philosophy,  and  from  the  unity  of  the  nature  of 
man  elsewhere  most  clearly  revealed,  that  Paul  was  in 
two  distinct  and  distant  places,  after  a  certain  manner,  at 
the  same  moment  of  time.  While  the  solitary  example 
of  the  traditionist,  refers  to  periods  two  thousand  years 
apart !!  But  let  all  our  bare  inferences  sink  into  merited 
oblivion,  and  let  us  both  agree,  that  the  three  examples 
are  mere  idiomatic  forms  of  expression  used  by  Paul, 
that  were  all  equally  well  understood  by  the  Corinthians 
and  Oolossians  to  whom  he  wrote ;  and  that  they  never 
supposed  Paul  was  actually  present  with  them,  while  his 
body  was  absent,  otherwise  than  in  mind  and  sympathy  ;* 
or  that  Paul  could  actually  go  to  Christ,  or  receive  his 
reward,  otherwise  than  in  a  body,  for  he  wrote,  as  trans- 
lated from  the  Syriac  in  the  10  v,  '^  For  we  are  all  to 
stand  before  the  judgment  seat  of  the  Messiah,  that  each 
may  receive  retribution  in  the  body^  [for]  what  he  hath 
done  in  it,  whether  of  good,  or  whether  of  evil."  These 
inferences  would  liever  have  been  drawn  if  we  had  not 
first  been  indoctrinated  into  the  dogma  of  the  separate 
conscious  existence  of  the  spirit. 

CHRIST   AND   THE  THIEF  IN  PARADISE. 

Luke  23  :  42,  "  The  thief  said  unto  Jesus,  Lord,  re- 
member me  when  thou  comest  into  thy  kingdom.  And 
Jesus  said  unto  him.  Verily  I  say  unto  thee,  to-day  shalt 
thou  be  with  me  in  Paradise." 

From  this  text  an  objector  infers  that  the  Spirit  of 
Christ,  and  the  spirit  of  the  thief,  were  certainly  together 
as  living  beings,  in  that  very  day,  in  a  place  called  Para- 
dise ;  which  place  some  supposed  to  be  in  the  heavens. 
In  reply  to  the  objector  we  observe,  that  this  is  the  first 
time  that  Paradise  is  named  in  the  Bible,  and  it  occurs 
but  twice  more,  in  2  Cor.  12:4,  and  Eev.  2 :  7,  and  in 
these  two  places,  we  have  proved,  that  Paradise  refers 
to  a  location  on  the  new  earth.  Please  observe  that 
the  kingdom  of  Christ,  in  which  the  thief  desired  to  bo 
remembered,  is  not  above  the  heavens,  nor  in  heaven, 


160  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

but  is  "  under  the  whole  heaven."  See  Dan.  7  :  14,  i8, 
27.  Paradise  is  a  word  of  Persian  origin,  and  means  a 
garden  of  delights.  It  is  used  in  the  Septuagint  to 
translate  the  garden  of  Eden.  We  desire  to  ask  a  few 
questions  :  1.  Did  not  the  thief  understand  the  Bible 
doctrine  of  Paradise,  and  of  the  coming  and  kingdom  of 
Christ,  better  than  the  *  learned'  divines  of  the  popular^ 
theory  ?  For  had  he  understood,  or  believed  that  the 
kingdom  of  Christ  was  not  under  the  whole  heaven,  but 
was  at  that  time  actually  in  heaven,  and  there  ready  to 
receive  all  penitent  immortal  souls  at  death :  Would  not 
his  prayer  have  been,:  Lord,  remember  my  soul  when  it 
leaves  the  body  and  receive  it  into  heaven  ?  But  he  of- 
fered no  such  prayer  because  he  did  not  believe  the  doc- 
trine. Instead  of  which  he  prayed,  "  Lord,  remember 
me  when  thou  comest  into  thy  kingdom."  Or  as  some 
manuscripts  read,  "  Lord,  remember  me  in  the  day  of 
thy  coming."  Both  of  which  questions  perfectly  harmo- 
nize with  the  Bible  doctrines,  that  he  must  die,  and 
"  know  not  anything,"  and  that  those  who  sleep  in  Jesus 
would  be  raised  from  the  dead  at  his  coming  and  the  es- 
tablishment of  his  kingdom  on  the  eajth.  2.  Supposing 
this  genuine  history,  and  the  thief  a  true  penitent :  Would 
the  compasionate  Savior  mock  him,  at  this  solemn  period, 
either  by  making  to  him  an  ambiguous  promise,  or  by 
promising  what  he  knew  would  not,  and  could  not  be 
fulfilled  V  3.  How  could  either  Christ  or  the  thief  be  in 
Paradise  that  day,  when  Paradise  does  not  yet  actually 
exist  ?  4.  How  could  Christ  be  in  Paradise  that  very 
day  he  was  crucified,  when  on  the  third  day  after  he  said 
to  Mary,  "  Touch  me  not ;  for  I  have  not  yet  ascended  to 
my  Father"  ?  John  20  :  17.  If  you  say,  the  ^  mel  here 
refers  to  his  body,  and  his  body  had  not  ascended  :  We 
reply,  it  is  the  same  '  me'  that  was  to  be  with  the  thief 
in  Paradise.  5.  Supposing  the  theory  true  that  is  taught 
by  some  of  our  "learned"  theologians,  that  the  soul  of 
Christ  went  to  a  hell,  as  defined  by  them,  burning  with 
fire  and  brimstone,  and  preached  to  the  damned  immortal 
souls  he  found  there,  during  the  three  days  and  three 
nights  that  he  was  dead,  How  could  he,  at  the  same 
time  be  with  the  thief  in  Paradise,  in  a  garden  of  de- 
lights, even  supposing  that  Paradise  did  exist  ?  6.  But 
supposing  that  the  Scripture  doctrine  is  the  only  true 


THE   PENITENT   THIEF's    CASE.  161 

one,  and  that  Chiist  truly  died,  that  his  soul — or  what  is 
the  same  thing,  himself — was  in  '  sheoP  or  '  hades' — 
which  means  a  state  of  death — How  could  any  part  of 
him,  whether,  soul,  body,  or  spirit,  as  a  living  thing,  be 
with  the  living  thief,  or  with  any  living  part  of  the  thief 
in  Paradise,  on  that  day,  or  any  day  while  both  were 
dead  ?  7.  Supposing  the  soul  of  Christ  continued  to 
live  in  Paradise  with  the  thief  immediately  after  the 
Scripture  says  he  died,  How  then  did  Christ  die  at  all  ? 
or  how  did  he  give  his  "  life"  for  the  world  ?  How 
could  he  then  be  raised  fro7Ji  the  dead  on  the  third  day, 
seeing  that  he  never  died  ?  8.  As  the  legs  of  the  thief 
were  not  broken  till  "  after  the  lighting  of  the  Sabbath 
candles,"  which  did  not  take  place  according  to  some, 
until  twenty-five-and-a-quarter  hours,  or  in  the  opinion  of 
others,  one-and-a-quarter  hours  after  the  expiration  of 
that  day — and  as  the  breaking  of  the  legs  was  not  in- 
tended to  cause  immediate  death,  but  to  prevent  recovery 
— How  could  the  thief,  while  hanging  alive  upon  the  cross, 
and  Christ  who  was  dead  during  the  three  remaining 
hours  of  that  day,  be  in  any  other  place  than  on  the 
cross  ?  9.  And  now  we  ask.  Will  not  the  true  answers 
to  these  questions  make  it  very  evident  that  the  comma 
has  been  placed  on  the  wrong  side  of  the  words  "  to- 
day" ? 

Stops,  be  it  remembered,  are  no  part  of  inspiration. 
The  Greek  Scriptures  were  originally  written  in  solid 
blocks  of  capital  letters,  without  division  into  sentences, 
or  stops  to  mark  clauses  of  sentences,  and  without  even 
division  into  words.  The  stops  are  a  comparatively  re- 
cent addition  of  about  the  tenth  century.  The  stops 
would  therefore  necessarily  be  made  to  conform  to  the 
theology  of  him  who  made  the  addition.  In  the  margin, 
(^riesbach  puts  the  stop  after  *  to-day.'  The  sense  of 
the  passage  is  evidently  something  hke  this.  The  thief 
prayed,  "  Lord,  remember  me  in  the  day  of  thy  coming. 
And  Jesus  said  unto  him.  Verily,  I  say  unto  you  this 
day,  fthe  day  of  my  coming,)  thou  shalt  be  with  me 
in  Paradise."  Or,  if  the  request  of  the  thief  be  truly  re- 
corded in  the  common  version,  then  the  answer  of  Christ 
probably  was,  "Verily  I  say  unto  thee  this  day,  (or  at 
this  time  I  promise  thee)  that  thou  shalt  be  with  me  in 
Paradise."     Which  would  be  equal  to,  "  Now  I  say  unto 


162  BIBLE  VS,  TRADITION, 

thee  thou  shalt  be  with  me  in  Paradise,  when  I  come  in 
my  kingdom."  At  all  events,  the  thief  and  our  Savior 
referred  to  the  same  period  oi  time,  and  as  the  thief  de- 
fines the  period  as  the  time  of  Christ's  second  coming,  so 
evidently  does  Jesus  refer  to  that  period  as  the  time  when 
the  promise  should  be  fulfilled.  Remember  the  request 
of  the  thief  was  to  be  remembered  when  Christ  came,  not 
when  Christ  went  away. 

To  shew  that  ^  to-day^  and  ^  this  day^  are  often  used 
merely  to  express  present  time,  we  might  quote  thirty- 
five  instances  from  the  single  book  of  Deuteronomy.  Ex- 
amples : — 30 :  11,  "  For  this  commandment  which  I  com- 
mand thee  this  day^  it  is  not  hidden  from  thee."  15  v, 
"  See  I  have  set  before  thee  this  day^  life  and  good,  and 
death  and  evil ;  in  that  I  command  thee  this  day  to  love 
the  Lord  thy  God"...."  But  if  thy  heart  turn  away.. ..and 
worship  other  Gods.. ..I  denounce  unto  you  this  day^  that 
ye  shall  surely  perish."  Suppose  we  were  to  take  the 
same  liberty  with  this  last  verse,  as  the  translators  have 
taken  in  the  verse  under  examination,  and  remove  the 
comma  from  the  proper  side  of  the  words  ^  this  day^ 
then  it  will  read,  "  I  denounce  unto  you  that,  this  day  ye 
shall  surely  perish."  Which  is  equal  to,  "  I  denounce 
unto  you  that  ye  shall  surely  perish  this  day^  But  the 
intelligent  must  perceive  that  this  shifting  of  the  comma 
makes  a  shameful  perversion  of  the  sense,  for  the  perish- 
ing was  evidently  to  take  place  at  a  future  period,  the 
period  of  their  apostacy.  But  this  is  not  a  greater  per- 
version, than  the  perversion  of  the  meaning  of  our  text, 
which  makes  Christ  say,  that  the  thief  should  be  with 
him  that  day  in  Paradise.  See  a  similar  example  in  Deut 
8:19.  The  words  to-day  are  used  to  represent  present 
time  also  in  Ps.  95  :  7;  Heb.  3  :  7,  13 ;  4:7;  13  :  8  ; 
Mat  6  :  30  ;  Luke  19  :  42 ;  and  many  other  places.  We 
leave  it  for  others  to  prove  the  geimineness  of  this  text, 
and  to  reconcile  it  with  other  plain  Scriptures,  which 
will  be  found  a  hopeless  task. 

THE   TRANSFIGURATION. 

Luke  9  :  26  ;  Mat.  16  :  28 ;  Eev.  19  :  11 ;  21:1;  Mark 
9 :  1 ,  "  For  whosoever  shall  be  ashamed  of  me  and  of  my 
words,  of  him  shall  the  Son  of  Man  be  ashamed,  when 


THE    TRANSFIGURATION.  163 

he  shall  come  in  his  own  glory,  and  in  his  Father's,  and 
of  the  holy  angels.  But  I  tell  you  of  a  truth,  there  be 
some  standing  here,  which  shall  not  taste  of  death,  till 
they  see  the  kingdom  of  God.  And  it  came  to  pass 
about  an  eight  days  after  these  sayings,  he  took  Peter, 
and  John,  and  James,  and  went  up  into  a  mountain  to 
pray.  And  as  he  prayed,  the  fashion  of  his  countenance 
was  altered,  and  his  raiment  was  white  and  glistening. 
And,  behold,  there  talked  with  him  two  men,  which  were 
Moses  and  Elias :  who  appeared  in  glory,  and  spake  of 
his  decease  which  he  should  accomphsh  at  Jerusalem. 
But  Peter  and  they  that  were  with  him  ivere  heavy  with 
sleep  :  and  when  they  were  awake,  they  saw  his  glory, 
and  the  two  men  that  stood  with  him.  And  it  came  to 
pass,  as  they  departed  from  him,  Peter  said  unto  Jesus, 
Master,  it  is  good  for  us  to  be  here  :  and  let  us  make 
three  tabernacles ;  one  for  thee,  and  one  for  Moses,  and 
one  for  Elias  :  TWt  knowing  what  he  said.  While  he  thus 
spake,  there  came  a  cloud  and  overshadowed  them  :  and 
they  feared  as  they  entered  into  the  cloud.  And  there 
came  a  voice  out  of  the  cloud,  saying.  This  is  my  beloved 
Son :  hear  him.  And  when  the  voice  was  past,  Jesus 
was  found  alone.  And  they  kept  it  close,  and  told  no 
man  in  those  days  any  of  those  things  which  they  had 
seen."  Matthew  adds,  "  Till  they  see  the  Son  of  Man 
coming  in  his  kingdom."  And,  "Tell  the  vision  to  no 
man  till  the  Son  of  Man  be  risen  from  the  dead."  Mark 
adds,  "  For  he  wist  not  ivhat  to  say  ;  for  they  were  sore 
afraid."  "  And  he  charged  them  that  they  should  tell 
no  man  what  things  they  had  seen,  till  the  Son  of  Man 
were  risen  from  the  dead."  The  Syriac  reads,  Luke  19  : 
32,  "  And  those  that  were  with  him  were  oppressed  tvitk 
droivsiness  ;  and  being  scarcely  aivahe^  they  saw  his  glor}', 
and  those  two  men  who  stood  near  him." 

From  this  passage  it  has  been  inferred,  1.  That  the 
kingdom  of  God  was  set  up  in  the  days  of  the  Apostles. 
And,  2.  That  Moses  was  present  in  a  spiritual  nature 
with  Christ  on  the  mount,  and  therefore  that  the  dead 
are  conscious.  To  the  first  objection,  we  reply,  that  it 
is  recorded  in  Eev.  19:  11,  and  21  :  1,  John  saw  in 
VISION  the  kingdom  of  God,  after  a  series  oi  future  pro- 
phetic events  had  transpired.  And  in  the  preceding  re- 
lation, Peter,  James,  and  John,  saw  in  vision  a  minature 


164  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

representation  of  the  kingdom.  A  vision  sometimes 
bears  such  a  resemblance  to  reahty  that  Peter  was  in 
doubt  on  another  occasion  where  he  supposed  a  real  oc- 
currence w^as  a  vision.  See  Acts  13:9.  As  we  have 
no  account  of  the  death  of  Elijah,  the  fact  of  his  personal 
appearance  on  the  mount  can  in  no  way  affect  the  ques- 
tion. Eespecting  Moses,  we  observe  that  his  miraculous 
appearance  in  vision  does  not  imply  his  personal  appear- 
ance, much  less  his  appearance  as  a  living  disembodied 
spirit :  which,  according  to  our  opponents'  own  showing, 
would  have  been  invisible  and  intangible,  and  as  we  aver, 
the  offspring  of  their  own  fancy.  If  Moses  was  person- 
ally there,  he  must  have  been  raised  from  the  dead,  for 
God  himself  declared.  Josh.  1  :  2,  That,  '^  Moses  my  ser- 
vant is  dead."  That  Moses  was  not  there,  excepting  in 
vision,  is  further  evident  from  the  fact  that  the  appear- 
ance of  the  three  was  as  though  they  had  assumed  their 
glorified,  incorruptible,  or  resurrection  bodies ;  whereas, 
Jesus  was  not  yet  glorified,  and  had  not  at  that  time  as- 
sumed his  resurrection  body  ;  and  Jesus  was  \h%  first  to 
manifest  this  life  and  incorruption,  2  Tim.  1:10^  when, 
at  a  subsequent  period^  he  had  risen  from  the  dead.  And, 
as  the  vision  had  no  counterpart  till  this  took  place,  Je- 
sus said  to  the  disciples,  (Mat.  17:  9;  Mark  9,)  "Tell 
the  vision  to  no  man,  until  the  Son  of  Man  be  risen  again 
from  the  dead."  As  Jesus  is  the  first\iOv\\.  from  the 
dead,  with  an  incorruptible  nature,  and  the^rs^-fruits  ot 
those  that  are  to  be  raised  to  incorruption  ;  and  as  Je- 
sus had  not  become  the  ^ first-horn^  or  ^first-fruits^  at 
that  period  ;  and  as  he  was  the  first  to  be  glorified — 
"  for  in  all  things  he  was  to  have  the  pre-eminence" — 
therefore,  Moses,  Elijah,  and  even  Christ,  were  glorified, 
at  that  time,  only  in  appearance^  for  special  objects.  One 
of  which  seems  to  have  been  to  show  to  these  disciples, 
that  the  authority  of  Moses  and  the  Prophets  as  law- 
givers, was  entirely  to  be  superceded  by  Jesus  Christ,  at 
his  resurrection ;  as  though  a  voice  from  heaven  had 
said,  "  When  Christ  is  glorified^  hear  not  Moses,  nor 
Elijah,  nor  the  Prophets,  as  authoritative  law-givers  ; 
but  this  is  my  beloved  Son,  hear  ye  him,  as  your  only 
accredited  law-giver  from  the  period  of  his  glorification." 
"  All  power  in  heaven  and  on  earth  is  given  unto  me.  Go 
ye,  THEREFORE,  and  teach  all  nations."     Moses  might 


QUESTIONS    FOR  TRADITIONISTS.  165 

have  been  raised  for  this  special  occasion,  but  not  in  his 
incorruptible  or  immortal  nature,  which  he  could  only 
have  in  appearance ;  and  if  such  were  the  case,  which 
we  think  not,  then  he  died  again;  for  he  certainly  did 
not  rise  with  his  immortal  nature  till  after  Jesus  Christ 
— the  first-fruits  of  the  resurrection — tO  "  life  and  incor- 
ruptiony 

Moreover,  let  it  be  remembered,  Moses  died  as  a 
punishment  for  his  transgression,  "Because  he  trespassed 
against  the  Lord,  among  the  children  of  Israel  at  the  wa- 
ters of  Meribah-Kadesh,  in  the  wilderness  of  Zin;"  al- 
though he  was  desirous  of  entering  into  the  promised 
land,  and  petitioned,  "  I  pray  thee,  let  me  go  over,  and 
see  the  good  land  that  is  beyond  Jordan,  that  goodly 
mountain  and  Lebanon;"  but  the  Lord  suffered  him  not 
to  enter  there  then,  but  only  to  see  it  with  his  eyes  and 
die  on  Mount  Nebo  outside  the  promised  inheritance  ; 
but  the  mount  of  transfiguration  w^as  within  the  promised 
inheritance.  See  Deut.  3  :  23-29  ;  4  :  21,  22;  33  :  49- 
52 ;  34  :  1-10  ;  1 :  37  ;  Num.  20  :  12,  24,  26 ;  27  :  12-14 ; 
Ps.  106 :  32,  33.  All  of  which  refer  to  the  death  of 
Moses  as  a  punishment,  for  "  the  Lord  was  wroth  with 
him... .and  would  not  hear  him,"  and  said  unto  him,  "  Let 
it  suflSce  thee ;  speak  no  more  unto  me  of  this  matter. 
Get  thee  up  into  the  top  of  Pisgah....and  behold  it  with 
thine  eyes:  for  thou  shalt  not  go  over  this  Jordan^ 
Moses  said,  "  Also  the  Lord  was  angry  with  me,  for 
your  sakes,  saying.  Thou  shalt  not  go  in  thither."  We 
are  therefore  justified  in  concluding  that  Moses  did  not 
go  into  the  promised  land  at  the  first  advent  of  Christ, 
nor  will  he,  till  he  enter  it  in  common  with  all  the  chil- 
dren of  Grod,  at  the  second  advent  of  Messiah.  ^ 

Now  may  we  be  permitted  to  ask  the  popular  up- 
holders of  the  current  theology  a  few  questions?  (1.) 
If  the  heaven  to  which  popular  theologians  consign  '  'im- 
mortal souls'  at  the  death  of  what  is  termed  '  the  body,' 
be  so  much  more  glorious  than  was  old  Canaan,  will  they 
condescend  to  explain  why  Moses  did  not  rather  choose 
to  die  on  Mount  Nebo,  and  go  immediately  to  this  more 
glorious  heaven,  than  to  pray  so  fervently  that  he  might 
enter  into  and  live  in  old  Canaan  ?  If  their  theory  were 
true,  then  his  "  death  was  the  gate  of  heaven."  (2.) 
Why  was  the  exchange  of  old  Canaan  for  glory,  and 


166  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

earth  for  heaven,  said  by  God,  himself,  to  be  a  punish" 
merit  to  Moses  for  his  trespass,  and  why  was  Moses  so 
loathe  to  make  the  exchange  ?  (3.)  Is  not  all  this  posi- 
tive proof  that  the  man  Moses^  as  a  whole^  as  a  unit,  died 
on  Mount  Nebo  ?  And,  if  he  has  had  no  resurrection 
since,  then  Moses  is  still  sleeping  in  the  dust,  and  his  ap- 
pearance and  talking  with  Christ  was  only  a  vision,  as 
Jesus  declared  it  to  be.  (4.)  If  good  men  go  to  heaven 
at  death,  then  God  took  Moses  to  heaven  to  punish  him 
for  his  trespass ;  and  then,  why  not  every  transgressor 
go  to  heaven  to  punish  them  for  their  trespasses  ?  When 
the  theologians  have  answered  these  questions  satisfac- 
torily, they  will  please  answer  the  following  before  they 
plume  themselves  with  the  truth  of  their  respective  and 
conflicting  creeds.  (5.)  If  the  Jews  beheved  that 
the  dead  are  alive  in  any  sense,  when  Christ,  in  Luke  8 : 
52,  told  them  that  the  maid  "  was  not  dead  but  sleepeth," 
Why  did  they  laugh  him  to  scorn,  *'  knowing  that  she 
was  dead"  ?  (6.)  Why  did  the  Jews,  Luke  9  :  7,  say  of 
Christ,  that  John,  or  one  of  the  old  prophets,  had  risen 
from  the  dead  ?  for  if  they  were  alive,  they  could  appear 
without  rising  from  the  dead,  and  if  alive  they  could  not 
rise  from  the  dead  !!  Some  said,  that  Elijah  had  appear- 
ed, whom  they  did  not  suppose  to  be  dead  ;  but  they  do 
not  say  that  he  had  risen  from  the  dead.  (7.)  If  the  beg- 
gar, Lazarus,  was  alive  among  the  living  in  heaven.  How 
could  he  arise  from  the  dead,  and  go  from  the  dead  to 
warn  the  living  ?  (8.)  Why  did  the  Jews  tell  Christ  that 
he  had  a  devil  only  for  saying  that  if  a  man  keep  my  say- 
ings he  should  never  see  death  ?  (9.)  And  why  were 
they  so  incensed  when  Chri&t  told  them  that  "  Abraham 
rejoiced  to  see  his  day,  and  he  saw  it,  and  was  glad"  ? 
Whereas  you  suppose  they  believed  that  Abraham  was 
in  heaven  and  could  see  what  transpired  upon  the  earth. 
John  8:51.  (10.)  When  Hezekiah  was  told  to  set  his 
house  in  order,  for  he  should  die  and  not  live,  why  did 
the  pious  king  cry  and  weep,  and  chatter  like  a  swallow? 
or,  why  did  he  dislike  to  die,  if  he  beheved  he  should 
enter  heaven  at  death  ?  See  Isa.  38  :  1-14.  (11.)  Why 
did  David,  Ps.  102  :  24,  pray,  "  O  my  God,  take  me  not 
away  in  the  midst  of  my  days"  ?  For  he  must  have 
surely  esteemed  it  far  better  for  him  to  go  to  heaven  than 
to  live  longer  upon  earth,  if  he  had  believed  in  the  current 


QUESTIONS    FOR    THEOLOGIANS.  f/TT'^'^V^  ^«^ 

philosophy.     (12.)  David  said,  "  I  will  sing  untoH^d^ord 
as  long  as  I  live,  while  I  live  will  I  praise  the  1t*Qrd," 
AVhy  does  not  David  give  us  the  least  hint  of  praising 
the  Lord  when  he  is  dead  ?     Why  say,  "  For  in  death 
there  is  no  remembrance  of  thee  :  in  the  grave,  who  shall 
give  thee  thanks  ?"    Ps.  6:5;   115:17;   146:2.    Would 
God  tell  David  in  Sam,  7:12,  that  '*  he  should  sleep  with 
his  fathers,'^  if  he  knew  that  David  would  at  death  awake 
with  his  fathers  in  heaven  ?     (13.)  Why  did  Christ  tell 
his  disciples,  "  I  go  to  my  Father,  and  ye  see  me  no 
more,'^  if  he  knew  that  they  at  death  would  see  him  in 
heaven?     John  16:  10.     (14.)  If  the  righteous  are  re- 
warded as  soon  as  they  die.  Why  does  Christ  say  that 
they  "  shall  be  recompensed  at  the  resurrection  of  the 
just^'  ?     And  why  does  Solomon  say  of  the  dead, "  Nei- 
ther have  they  any  more  a  reward"?     Luke  14*  14; 
Ecc.  9  :  5.     (15.)  If  the  righteous  are  rewarded  in  hea- 
ven and  not  on  the  new  earth.  Why  does  God  say,  "  Be- 
hold the  righteous  shall  be  recompensed  in  the  earth, 
much  more  the  wicked  and  the  sinner?'      Prov.  11 :  31. 
(16.)  If  the  wicked  are  to  be  punished  in  a  hell  that  is 
not  upon  this  earth,  how  is  it  that  they  receive  their 
recompense  upon  the  earth,  and  much  more  so  than  the 
righteous,  who  are  to  inherit  the  earth  for  ever  ?     How 
then  could  God  say,  that  "  he  will  punish  the  kings  of 
the  earth  upon  the  earth  ?"  Isa.   24  :  21.     Is  not  this 
plain  proof  that  he  will  burn  up  the  wicked  upon  the  old 
earth,  and  recompense  the  righteous  in  the  new  earth  ? 
(17.)  If  all  go  to  heaven   or  hell  when  they  die,  How 
could  the  four  leprous  men  say,  when  they  had  deter- 
mined to  enter  the  camp  of  the  enemy,  "  If  they  save  us 
alive,  we  shall  live ;  and  if  they  kill  us  we  shall  but  die  ?" 
2  Kings  7  :  4,  For  the  going  to  heaven  or  hell,  they 
would  have  considered  a  greater  event  than  to  die.     (18.) 
In  Mat.  7  :  22,  and  Luke  13  :  25,  it  is  written,  "  Many 
will  say  to  me  in  that  clay^  Lord,  Lord,  have  we  not  pro- 
phesied in  thy  name  ?"  &c«     "  And  knock  at  the  door, 
saying,  Lord,  Lord,  open  unto  us."     If  these,  at  death, 
had  been  consigned  to  a  hell  of  fire.  Would  they  have 
come  up,  smoking  with  tire  and  brimstone,  with  the  de- 
luded expectation  of  getting  into  heaven,  and  crave  ad- 
mittance, and  plead  their  wonderful  works  which  they 
had  done  in  the  name  of  Christ,  after  they  had  expe- 


168  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

rienced  this  terrible  foretaste  of  God's  displeasure? 
(19.)  If  death  means  endless  misery,  of  the  most  intense 
kind,  Why  is  it  said  of  the  wicked,  as  in  Eev.  9:6,  "  In 
those  days  shall  men  seek  death,  and  shall  not  find  it; 
and  shall  desire  to  die,  and  death  shall  flee  from  them  ?" 
Did  they  desire  to  exchange  protracted  earthly  suffer- 
ings, for  severer  endless  sufferings  ?  (20.)  If  the  pro- 
phet Jonah  beheved  that  the  wicked  go  to  a  place  of  in- 
tense torment  at  death.  How  dared  he,  in  a  fit  of  stub- 
born anger,  pray  to  God,  "  Take  my  life  from  me,  for  it 
is  better  for  me  to  die  than  to  live"  ?  (21.)  If  the  right- 
eous are  written,  that  is,  enrolled  in  heaven,  as  says  Paul 
in  Heb.  12 :  23,  and  if  to  be  blotted  out  of  this  book  of 
life,  implies  endless  misery  in  hell.  How  dare  Moses  say 
to  God,  "  Blot  me  I  pray  thee,  out  of  the  book  that  thou 
hast  written"  ?  Ex.  32  :  32.  Is  it  not  plain  that  Moses 
had  no  idea  of  eternal  misery  resulting  as  a  consequence 
of  being  blotted  out  of  the  book  of  life?  (22.)  Could 
Paul  have  wished  himself  accursed  from  Christ  for  his 
brethren,  his  kinsmen  according  to  the  flesh,  if  he  knew 
that  this  would  expose  him  to  a  hell  burning  with  brim- 
stone, in  which  he  would  continue  conscious  for  ever  ? 
Rom.  9  :  3.  It  is  impossible  that  Paul  thus  wished.  The 
learned  confess  this,  and  therefore  make  labored  and 
fruitless  efforts,  to  explain  away  the  plain  and  literal 
meaning  of  God's  word.  But  if  these  same  learned 
^*  divines"  were  but  to  spend  half  their  eflbrts  to  explain 
their  own  absurdities,  and  were  to  cast  away  their  own 
inventions  about  ^  immortal  souls,'  and  ^  deathless  spirits,' 
and  '  endless  misery,'  and  ^  going  to  a  heaven  at  death,* 
that  is  ^  beyond  the  bounds  of  time  and  space'— with 
other  hke  traditions  of  men — they  would  find  but  little 
difficulty  with  the  self  sacrificing  love  of  Moses  and  of 
Paul  for  their  countrymen.  (23.)  Are  not  the  theories 
of  the  '  natural  immortality  of  the  soul,'  of  ^  endless  tor- 
ment,' the  ^  spirit  land,'  and  the  kindred  fancies,  univer- 
sally believed  by  the  professed  church  ?  And  did  not 
our  Savior  say,  Luke  18  :  8,  "  Nevertheless  when  the 
Son  of  Man  cometh,  shall  he  find  faith  on  the  earth  ?" 
Is  there  not,  therefore,  presumptive  evidence,  that  the 
belief  of  these  fables  constituted  the  predicted  state  of 
the  professed  church  prior  to  the  coming  of  the  Lord  ? 
To  the  dragon  is  ascribed  the    deceiving  of  the  whole 


t!ONt!LUDING    REMARKS.  169 

world ;  but  to  these  false  prophets,  that  is,  these  pro- 
pounders  of  false  doctrines,  is  ascribed  the  "  deceiving  of 
«iy  people."  It  will  be  time  enough  to  present  a  few 
snore  questions,  when  these  are  satisfactorily  answered, 

CONCLUDING   REMARKS. 

We  have  now  replied  to  the  principal  objections 
brought  against  those  views  which  we  have  shown  to  be 
truth.  We  have  likewise  harmonized  all  those  Scrip- 
tures wath  the  general  tenor  of  the  whole  Bible,  which 
have  been  perverted,  by  a  popular  theology,  so  as  to  fa- 
vor the  fables  we  are  opposing,  with  the  exception  of  the 
Parable  of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus,  which  will  come 
under  revision  in  its  proper  place  :  and  we  have  pre- 
sented more  than  three  thousand  plain  texts  of  Scrip- 
tures which  are  in  direct  opposition  to  the  particular 
theories  w^e  are  opposing.  We  have  shown  that  there  is 
not  one  single  text  in  the  whole  Bible,  which,  properly 
explained,  affords  the  shadow  of  sound  argument  for  the 
prevalent  and  popular  fables.  There  is  not  a  text  in  the 
whole  Bible  that  will  prove  the  separate  existence  of  the 
«oul,  nor  the  separate  existence  of  a  conscious  spirit, 
either  mortal  or  immortal,  in  man  or  beast.  There  is 
not  a  single  text  that  even  intimates  that  soul,  spirit,  or 
thoughts,  as  conscious  things,  leave  tlie  body  at  death, 
*o  exist  in  any  otlier  world.  Will  the  lovers  of  truth 
permit  a  few  inferences — which  we  have  shown  to  be 
improperly  drawn  from  a  very  few  passages  of  Scripture 
—to  become  the  standard  of  truth,  although  contradicted 
by  thousands  of  plaintexts?  and  although  there  are 
thousands  of  other  plain  texts  that  explicitly  teach  the 
very  opposite  of  these  inferences  ? 


170 


CHAPTEE  X. 


ON   THE    DESTRUCTION   OF   THE  WICKEDV 

Mat.  10  :  28,  "  Pear  not  them  which  kill  the  body,  but 
are  not  able  to  kill  the  soul :  but  rather  fear  him  which 
is  able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in  helL" 

The  word  ivsii^\2itedkil\^apoktemd,fram  apo mtensw&j. 
and  kteinoy  to  kill,  implies  cruelty  and  violence,  equal  to 
murder ;  apolesai,  to  destroy,  in  the  sense  of  putting  out 
of  existence  ;  body  is  sometimes  used  in  the  sense  of  be- 
ing, and  psuche,  is  often  translated  life-.  Gehenna  means 
the  valley  of  Hinnom.  So  the  text  will  bear  this  trans- 
lation— "  Pear  not  those  who  are  only  able  to  murder  the 
body,  but  are  not  able  to  destroy  the  life,  or  being ;  but 
rather  fear  him  who  is  able  to  destroy  both  life  and  be- 
ing in  the  valley  of  Hinnom."  See  Jam.  4  :  12,  ^^'^  There? 
is  one  law-giver  who  is  able  to  save  and  to  destroy."  The 
parallel  place  in  Luke  12:  4,  reads,  "Be  not  afraid  oi 
them  that  kill  the  body,  and  after  that  have  no  more  that 
they  can  do.  But  I  will  forewarn  you  whom  ye  shall 
fear  :  Pear  him,  who  after  he  hath  killed  hath  power  to 
cast  into  Gehenna  ;  yea^  I  say  unto  you,,  fear  him." 

The  almost  universal  belief  of  the  different  sect^ 
throughout  Christendom  is,  that  there  is  now  existing 
somewhere,  a  lake  burning  with  fire  and  brimstone ;  or 
a  hell  into  which  the  souls  of  all  the  wicked,  separated 
from  their  bodies,  are  plunged  at  death,  and  that  they 
are  tormented  in  this  place,  before  the  general  judgment- 
That  prior  to  the  general  judgment,  these  souls  are  again 
*  reunited'  to  their  bodies,  which  bodies^  some  affirm,  are 
then  made  as  immortal  as  the  ghosts,  and  thus  appear 
before  the  tribunal  of  judgment  to  receive  their  final 


1  THE   PAGAN   HELL.  171 

'  3oom ;  'vvhence  they  are  remanded  back  again  to  their 
old  place  of  torment,  to  writhe  in  the  most  intense 
misery,  without  any  intermission,  for  ever  and  ever. 
Thus  representing  that  many  of  these  criminals  are 
punished  thousands  of  years  before  they  are  judged  !  Of 
course,  some  of  the  sects  will  vary  a  little  respecting  the 
details,  but  this  embraces  the  general  features  of  what  is 
usually  taught  by  *  the  orthodox'  !!I  Well  might  Mr. 
Dobney  exclaim,  "  Tremendous  orthodoxy  this,  my  bre- 
thren !"  These  rehcs  of  paganism,  papacy,  and  purga- 
tory, are  still  taught,  in  this  nineteenth  century,  as  the 
veritable  teachings  of  the  book  of  God  ;  and  supposed  to 
be  necessary  to  induce  men  to  refrain  from  vice,  to  love 
God,  and  to  enter  into  sectarian  churches.  It  is  to  be 
feared  that  there  are  not  a  few,  who — though  convinced 
that  these  things  are  fables — ^for  the  love  of  popularity, 
and  perhaps  by  the  more  sordid  love  of  gain,  do  not  lift 
up  their  voices  in  execration  against  such  infamous  blas- 
phemy against  a  God  of  love,  and  justice  !! 

In  exposing  these  human  traditions,  we  shall  take  up 
the  subject  as  follows : — First^  Describe  the  different 
kinds  of  hell  believed  in  by  men.  Second^  Show  the  na- 
ture of  the  hell  of  the  Bible.  Third ^  Prove  from  the 
Bible  what  will  be  the  final  destiny  of  the  wicked. 

Most  nations  believe  that  hell,  as  defined  by  them- 
selves, is  already  in  existence,  and  there  are  five  hells 
that  have  obtained  a  prominence :  (1.)  The  Pagan  hell; 
(2.)  The  Mahomedan  hell;  (3.)  The  Eoman  Catholic 
hell ;  (4.)  The  Protestant  hell ;  and  (5.)  The  proper  hell 
of  the  Bible.     We  proceed  to  describe — 

1.    THE   PAGAN   HELL. 

The  Pagan  hell  is  usually  described  as  a  wide  dark 
cave  under  ground.  The  entrance  to  it  is  down  a  steep 
and  rocky  descent.  Then  a  gloomy  grove.  After  that 
a  lake  called  Avernus,  from  which  such  poisonous  vapors 
arise^  that  if  a  bird  fly  over  it,  it  is  poisoned  and  dies. 
Beyond  the  grove  and  lake,  at  the  entrance  of  hell,  seve- 
ral monsters  are  placed,  who  bring  men  to  death  and  de- 
struction. These  are  said  to  increase  the  inhabitants  of 
hell.  Their  names  are,  Care,  Sorrow,  Disease,  Old  Age, 
Frights,  Famines,  Wants,  Labor,  Sleep,  Death,  Sting  of 


172  BlfiLE  VS*  TRADITION. 

Conscience,  Force,  Fraud,  Strife,  and  Fear.  At  the 
side  of  the  lake  an  old  man  named  Charon,  or  the  Ferry 
Man,  stands  in  his  boat  to  carry  the  souls  across  the 
lake.  On  the  shore  the  souls  appear  in  flocks,  and  those 
whose  bodies  were  buried,  go  over  the  lake  when  their 
bodies  die ;  the  others  wander  about  the  shore  a  hundred 
years,  and  then  are  carried  over.  Charon  is  considered 
the  god  of  that  dreary  place.  All  the  souls  pay  a  small 
piece  of  money  to  Charon  for  being  ferried  across  the 
lake.  The  heathen  say,  there  are  four  rivers  that  run 
through  hell.  The  first  is  the  river  Acheron.  Acheron, 
a  son  of  Zera,  born  in  a  cave,  because  he  could  not  en- 
dure the  light  ran  down  into  hell,  and  was  changed  into 
a  river  of  bitter  water.  The  second  river  is  called  Styx ; 
rather  a  lake  than  a  river.  Styx  was  the  fabled  daugh- 
ter of  Oceanus,  and  was  changed  into  the  Stygian  lake 
by  which  the  gods  swore,  and  kept  their  oaths.  The 
third  river  is  called  Cocytus,  and  runs  out  of  the  Stygian 
lake,  and  groans  and  laments  to  imitate  the  bowlings  of 
the  damned,  and  increase  their  exclamations.  The  fourth 
river  is  called  Phlegethon,  so  called  because  it  swells 
with  waves  of  fire,  and  all  its  streams  are  flames. 

All  these  rivers  the  souls  must  pass  over  and  then 
they  arrive  at  the  Palace  of  Pluto,  the  god  of  hell.  The 
gate  of  Pluto  is  guarded  by  Cerebus,  a  dog  with  three 
heads,  whose  hair  is  living  snakes.  He  is  considered  the 
porter  of  hell.  Saturn  gave  his  son  Pluto  this  infernal 
dominion,  because  he  invented  burying,  and  funeral 
mourning.  He  likewise  reigns  over  death.  He  sits  up- 
on his  throne  in  the  dark,  holding  a  key  instead  of  a 
sceptre.  He  is  crowned  with  ebony.  Pluto,  which 
signifies  wealth,  is  king.  The  Greeks  call  him  Hades  ; 
or  gloom,  darkness,  or  melancholy.  He  was  sometimes 
called  Agelatos,  because  he  drives  people  to  the  infernal 
regions ;  Agelastos,  because  he  refrains  from  laughter. 
Summanus,  or  chief  of  the  infernal  deities.  (It  would 
appear  that  the  Greeks  meant  either  death  or  the  grave 
by  their  word  ^  hades,'')  Pluto,  it  is  said,  has  a  queen 
named  Prosepine,  who  enjoys  the  infernal  regions  with 
him.  There  are  three  old  women  called /a^^s,  ordering 
the  past,  the  present,  and  the  future.  They  fix  every- 
thing so  that  nothing  can  be  altered  to  eternity.  To 
them  is  entrusted  the  management  of  the  fatal  thread  of 


THE    PAGAN   HELL.  itS 

life.  Clotho  gives  us  life;  Lachesis  determines  what 
shall  befall  us  here ;  and  Atropos  concludes  our  lives. 
In  hell  are  likewise  three  furies,  who  punish  the  wicked, 
and  torment  the  consciences  of  secret  offenders.  There 
is  likewise  an  inferior  god,  called  Nox,  represented  as  a 
skeleton  w^ith  black  wings.  Another  god  is  called  Sa- 
monus,  or  sleep  ;  he  is  thought  useful  to  men.  There 
are  three  judges  in  this  hell,  which  judge  the  souls  which 
come  there.  There  are  some  giants  and  some  kings 
there.  All  are  doomed  to  endless  existence  in  misery. 
Pheleggus,  a  king,  burned  the  temple  of  Apollo  ;  he  was 
condemned  to  remain  in  hell  for  ever,  with  a  great  stone 
hung  over  his  head,  which  he  expects  every  moment  to 
fall  upon  him,  and  crush  him  to  pieces.  (So  he  sits  eter- 
nally fearing  that  w^hich  will  never  come  to  pass.)  Ixion 
for  his  crime,  w^as  struck  down  to  hell  with  thunder,  and 
tied  fast  to  a  wheel,  which  will  eternally  turn  him  round. 
A  robber  is  condemned  to  roll  a  great  stone  to  the  top 
of  a  hill,  which  invariably  slips  down  before  he  reaches 
the  top. 

In  this  hell  there  was  a  place  called  the  Elysium.  This, 
though  in  the  dominion  of  Pluto,  was  a  region  of  de- 
hghts.  To  this  region  resorted  the  souls  of  the  good, 
after  being  purged  from  the  hght  offences  committed  in 
this  world.  (Here  is  the  origin  of  purgatory,  and  of  the 
spirit  land,  and  perhaps  of  the  paradise,  as  at  present 
supposed  to  exist.)  Elysium  has  verdant  fields,  shady 
groves,  fine  breezes,  and  all  fine  things.  There  is  like- 
wise a  river  called  Lethe,  causing  forgetfulness  to  all 
who  drink  of  its  waters  of  all  their  former  troubles.  This 
is  but  a  short  description  of  the  Pagan  hell.  See  Toole' s 
Pantheon^  p.  219. 

We  may  here  trace  the  origin  of  the  superstitious 
practice  of  placing  a  piece  of  money  in  the  hands  of  the 
dead,  to  pay  Peter  instead  of  Charon.  Here,  too,  we 
may  trace  the  origin  of  the  ideas  of  an  already  existing 
hell  as  a  place  for  living  souls,  of  purgatory,  of  paradise, 
and  of  other  errors.  The  location  of  this  hell  is  not 
clearly  defined.  Homer  assumes  the  place  of  the  dead 
to  be  a  land  at  the  extremity  of  the  ocean^  attainable  by 
navigation ;  Virgil,  a  region,  attainable  only  by  descend- 
ing into  tJie  bowels  of  the  earth     Compare  Odyssey,  1 1 , 


174  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

and  JSneid,  6  :  from  whence  the  fkble  has  crept  into  the 
professed  church. 

2.    THE   MAHOMEDAN   HELL. 

The  Alcoran  describes  a  last  judgment,  where  all  will 
be  judged  according  to  their  works.  The  trial  being 
over  and  the  assembly  dissolved ;  those  who  are  awarded 
to  Paradise,  take  the  right  hand  way ;  while  those  that 
are  destined  to  hell  fire,  take  the  left  hand.  But  both 
must  pass  the  bridge  Alsirat,  which  is  laid  over  the  mid- 
dle of  hell,  which  bridge  is  finer  than  a  hair,  and  sharper 
than  a  sword.  The  wicked  miss  their  footing  and  fall 
headlong  into  hell.  This  hell  has  seven  gates.  The 
first  for  Mussulmen ;  the  second  for  Christians ;  the 
third  for  Jews ;  the  fourth  for  the  Sabians ;  the  fifth 
for  the  Magicians ;  the  sixth  for  Pagans  ;  and  the  seventh 
and  worst  of  all,  for  the  hypocrites  of  all  rehgions.  The 
inhabitants  of  this  hell  will  sufier  a  variety  of  torments 
of  eternal  duration ;  with  the  exception  of  those  who 
have  embraced  the  true  religion ;  such  will  be  delivered 
from  hell  after  having  expiated  their  crimes  by  suffer- 
ing.— Adams*  View  of  Religions ^  p.  322. 

3.  THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  HELL. 

The  Papist  describes  hell  as  a  place  burning  with  fire, 
in  which  the  wicked,  dying  out  of  '  the  church,'  will  be 
eternally  tormented.  They  hold  likewise  to  a  place  of 
purgation,  called  purgatory.  This  was  taken  from  the 
Pagans,  and  is  the  same  thing  under  another  name.  Mo- 
sheim  says,  vol.  2,  p.  38, — *'  The  famous  Pagan  doctrine 
concerning  the  purification  of  departed  souls,  by  means 
of  a  certain  kind  of  fire,  was  more  amply  explained  and 
confirmed  now  than  it  had  formerly  been.  And  in  the 
tenth  century,  the  people  dreaded  the  fire  of  purgatory, 
more  than  they  did  the  fire  of  hell ;  for  they  supposed 
that  by  being  enriched  with  the  prayers  of  the  clergy 
when  they  were  dying,  they  should  certainly  escape  hell. 
But  they  were  taught  that  if  they  went  to  purgatory,  it 
was  a  matter  of  doubt  whether  they  ever  should  be  de- 
livered from  that  dreadful  place." 

Yea,  it  is  an  historical  fact  that  the  priests  led  the  pec- 


THE    PROTESTANT   HELL.  175 

pie  astray,  and  that  for  the  sake  of  filthy  lucre.  Therefore, 
■*'  Try  the  spirits  whether  they  be  of  God  :  because  many 
false  prophets,  (or  propouaders  of  false  doctrines)  have 
gone  out  into  the  world,"  And  while  you  despise  not 
prophesyings,  prove  all  things,  and  hold  fast  only  that 
which  i^  good, 

4.    THE    PROTESTANT   HELL. 

We  now  propose  to  describe  ttie  hell  which  those  call- 
ed Christians  believe  in,  as  a  place  of  the  most  intense 
misery,  without  mitigation,  and  without  end.  We  have 
«een  that  the  Pagans,  the  Mahomedans,  and  the  Catho- 
lics, hold  to  a  hell  that  has  a  place  to  purify  at  least  a 
portion  of  those  that  are  cjist  into  it.  But  we  know  of 
but  one  :&eet  of  Protestants  who  believe  in  this  part  of 
Paganism.  That  one,  is  a  sect  of  the  Universahsts ;  and 
for  this  they  are  indebted  to  the  heathen.  But  while 
Protestanism  borrows  the  Roman  Cathohc  hell,  a  little 
modified  from  the  Pagan,  they  reject  its  better  feature, 
the  chauce  for  a  few  to  escape  its  fabled  horrors. 

As  Mr.  Benson  is  the  acknowledged  standard  ortho- 
dox writer  of  Methodism,  his  description  will  suffice  for 
the  Protestant  hell.  Hear  him — ^*  God  is  present  in  hell 
in  his  infinite  justice,  and  almighty  wrath,  as  an  unfathom- 
able sea  of  liquid  fire^  wiiere  the  wicked  must  drink  in 
everlasting  torture.  The  presence  of  God  in  his  ven- 
geance, scatters  darkness  and  woe  through  the  dreary 
regions  of  misery.  As  heaven  would  be  bo  heaven  if 
Ood  did  not  there  manifest  his  love :  so  hell  would  be 
no  hell  if  God  did  not  there  display  his  wrath.  It  is  the 
presence  of  God  which  gives  everything  virtue  and  effi- 
cacy ;  without  which  there  can  be  no  life,  no  sensibility, 
lao  powder.  God  is  therefore  himself  present  in  hell  to 
see  the  punishment  of  those  rebels  against  his  govern- 
ment, that  it  may  be  adequate  to  the  infinitude  of  their 
guilt.  His  fiery  indignation  kindles,  and  his  incensed 
fury  feeds  the  flames  of  their  torments^-  while  his  power- 
fill  presence  and  operation  maintains  their  being,  and 
renders  ail  their  powei*s  more  acutely  sensible  ;  thus  set- 
ting the  keenest  edge  upon  their  pain,  and  making  it  cut 
niosl  intolerably  deep.  He  will  exert  all  his  divine  at- 
tributes to  make  them  as  wretched  as  the  capacity  of^ 
their  being  will  adn;it" 


176  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION* 

After  this,  the  Doctor  goes  on  to  describe  the  duratioa 
of  this  work  of  God,  and  calls  to  his  aid  all  the  stars,  and 
sand,  and  drops  of  water,  and  makes  each  one  tell  a  mil- 
lion of  ages,  and  when  all  these  ages  have  rolled  away^ 
he  goes  over  the  same  number  again,  and  again,,  and  so 
on  for  ever. 

If  this  description  were  not  the  result  of  the  grossest 
ignorance,  we  should  be  obliged  to  characterize  it  as  the 
worst  of  blasphemy.  Perhaps  all  the  *  orthodox'  Pro- 
testants will  not  endorse  the  Doctor's  definition  of  the 
torments  of  hell ;  but  they  will  all  agree  with  him  in  two 
particulars  ;  that  these  torments  are  of  a  most  excrucia- 
ting character,  and  that  their  duration  is  eternal.  In 
this  horrible  account  of  the  work  of  God  in  tormenting 
the  work  of  his  own  hands,  we  find  no  passage  of  Scrip- 
ture quoted  to  prove  any  of  its  points.  We  will  venture 
the  assertion  that  there  is  not  a  text  to  be  found  that 
leans  that  way.  Nay,  more ;  that  it  flatly  contradicts 
God's  own  statement,  Job  37  :  23,  "  Touching  the  Al- 
mighty, we  cannot  find  him  out ;  he  is  excellent  in  power, 
and  in  judgment,  and  in  plenty  of  justice  he  will  not  af- 
flict. Wherefore  let  mortals  reverence  him,  whom  none 
of  the  wise  in  heart  can  discern."  But  this  wise  Doctor 
professes  to  have  found  out  that  God  is  dehghting  him- 
self continually  in  horrible  and  revolting  injustice  towards 
those  '  immortal  souls,'  which  some  contend  are  a  part 
of  God  himself.  We  could  produce  many  other  texts 
that  this  account  contradicts,  but  content  ourselves  ak 
present  by  quoting  Ps.  145:  9,  '-^  The  Lord  is  good  to 
all ;  and  his  tender  mercies  are  over  all  his  works."  Lam. 
3  :  33,  "  For  he  doth  not  afilict  willingly,  nor  grieve  the 
children  of  men.  To  crush  under  his  feet  all  the  prison- 
ers of  the  earth."  Ez.  33  :  11,  *'  As  I  live,  saith  the  Lord 
God,  I  have  no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked." 
If  God  has  no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked,  in  the 
extinction  of  their  being,  how  can  he  have  pleasure  in 
exercising  his  powers  to  produce  protracted  and  intense 
suflering,  conscious  sufiering,  without  mercy  and  with- 
out end  ?  Nah.  1:9,"  What  do  ye  imagine  against  the 
Lord  ?  He  will  make  an  utter  end  :  affliction  shall  not 
rise  up  a  second  time."  Isa.  10  :  25,  "  For  yet  a  very 
little  while,  and  the  indignation  shall  cease,  and  mine  an- 
ger in  their  destruction."     We  trace  the  Protestant  hell, 


MEANING    OF    THE    WORD    HELL.  177 

first  to  the  Pagan  notion  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul ; 
secondly^  to  the  Eoman  Catholic  hell ;  and  thirdly^  to  a 
misconception  of  some  passages  of  Scriptures  which 
would  not  have  been  perverted,  but  for  the  beUef  of  the 
other  two. 

II.    THE    HELL    OF    THE    BIBLE. 

The  Bible  does  indeed  reveal  a  hell,  but  not  by  any 
means  such  a  one  as  will  correspond  with  any  of  the  pre- 
ceding. We  shall  closely  examine  all  those  terms  that 
have  been  supposed  to  mean  hell,  as  a  place  of  protracted 
suffering.  The  terms  are  : — Hell — Pit — Bottomless 
Pit — Prison — Grave — Nether  or  lower  parts  of  the 
earth — Shevah — Kever — Sheol — Hades — Gehenna— To- 
phet — Tartarus — Lake  of  fire  and  brimstone — ^Unquench- 
able fire. 

1.    MEANING    OF    THE   WORD   HELL. 

This  word  is  now  generally  understood  to  mean  a 
place  in  which  the  damned  are  perpetually  tormented  ; 
the  orthodox  hell  corresponds  with  the  Tartarus  of  the 
ancient  heathen.  But  originally  hell  had  a  mild  and 
harmless  signification.  It  is  of  Saxon  origin,  and  is  de- 
rived from  the  verb  helan^  and  was  spelled  hele^  helle^ 
hell^  heile^  and  helan.  It  meant,  to  hele,  or  to  hell,  heal, 
hill,  shell,  hulk,  shovel,  shiel,  shield,  shawl,  i.  e.,  to  cover 
up,  to  hide.  The  word  in  its  primitive  form  is  still  re- 
tained in  the  eastern^  and  especially  the  western  counties 
of  England;  and  means  something  hidden  or  covered, 
the  grave.  To  hele  over  a  thing  is  to  cover  it.  The 
word  hell  is  still  retained  in  the  English  liturgy,  according 
to  the  old  English  translation  oi  sheol ^  in  Ps.  49  :  14  ;  55: 
16  ;  88 :  2 ;  89  :  47  ;  it  is  now  altered  in  these  places  to 
grave.  Those  who  wish  to  trace  this  word  hell  to  its 
origin  may  consult  Lord  Kingh  History  of  the  Creed, 
ch.  4 ;  Doddridge  on  Eev.  1 :  18  ;  Leigh'' s  Crit.  Sacr.  in 
haides  ;  Junius^  Etymolog.  Anglican  in  Heile  and  Hele  ; 
and  Dr.  Clarke,  Mat.  11 :  23.  The  Dr.  says,  hell  comes 
from  the  Saxon  helan^  to  cover ^  or  hide  ;  hence  the  tihng 
or  slating  of  a  house  is  called  in  Cornwall,  heling,  to  this 
day ;  and  in  Lancashire  the  covers  of  books  are  SQ  called, 


178  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

The  first  translators  of  the  Bible  undoubtedly  meant  by 
hell^  a  covered  or  unseen  place,  the  grave,  and  perhaps 
sometimes  the  state  of  death  ;  making  the  word  synono- 
mous  with  the  Hebrew  sheol^  and  the  Greek  hades  ;  and 
never  designed  it  to  represent  a  place  of  conscious  suf- 
fering :  that  is  a  refinement  of  modern  days.  The  word 
occurs  fifty-two  times  in  the  common  translation.  It  is 
translated  from  the  words  sheol^  hades^  gehenyva^  and  tar- 
tarus.  But  as  we  design  to  investigate  the  meaning  of 
every  original  word  bearing  upon  our  subject,  this  ac- 
count  of  the  English  word  hell  will  suflSce. 

2.    ON    THE    WORD    PIT. 

The  word  Pit  as  a  place  of  deposit  for  the  dead,  only 
means  the  grave.  The  word  occurs  more  than  seventy 
times  in  the  O.  T.,  and  is  translated  from  ten  different 
Hebrew  words.  It  will  only  be  necessary  to  examine 
three,  as  having  any  allusion  to  death,  sheol^  the  grave, 
as  a  general  term,  or  the  state  of  death;  shokhath,  de- 
struction ;  and  I)our^  pit. 

Ez.  32  :  23,  "  Whose  {kever)  graves  are  set  in  the  sides 
of  the  {hour)  pit."  Ps.  30  :  9,  "  0  Lord,....what  profit  is 
there  in  my  blood,  when  I  go  down  to  {shokhath)  [de- 
struction]? Shall  the  dust  praise  thee  ?  Shall  it  declare 
thy  truth"  ?  SJwkhath  is  here  translated  pit.  Ps.  9  : 
15,  "  The  heathen  are  sunk  down  in  the  {shokhath)  [de- 
struction] that  they  made :  in  the  net  which  they  hid  is 
their  own  foot  taken."  Ps.  35  :  7,  "  For  without  cause 
have  they  hid  for  me  their  net  {slwkhath)  [destruction]  ; 
without  cause  they  have  digged  for  my  soul."  Ps.  94 : 
13,  "  That  thou  may  est  give  him  rest  from  the  days  of 
adversity,  until  {shokhath)  destruction  be  cut  out  for  the 
wicked."  Isa.  38  :  17,  "  Thou  hast  in  love  to  my  soul, 
delivered  it  from  {shokhath)  destruction."  Well  might  the 
translators  translate  shokhath^  pit^  in  this  place  to  con- 
ceal the  fact  that  if  the  pious  Hezekiah  had  died  at  that 
time,  his  soul  would  have  been  destroyed  until  the  resur- 
rection. Isa.  51  :  14,  "  The  captive  exile  hasteneth  that 
he  may  be  loosed,  and  thai  he  should  not  die  in  {shok- 
hath) destruction,  (or  should  not  be  destroyed,)  nor  that 
his  bread  should  fail."  Lam.  4  :  20,  "  The  breath  of  our 
nostrils,  the  anointed  of  the  Lord,  was  taken  in  their 


MEANING   OP    THE    WORD    PIT.  179 

(shokhath)  destruction^  of  whom  we  said,  Under  his  sha- 
dow we  shall  live  among  the  heathen."  This  appears  to 
be  a  prophecy,  relating  to  the  destruction  of  the  being  of 
Christ,  till  God  raised  him  from  the  dead. 

Ez.  28:  8, ''  They  shall  bring  thee  down  to  (shokhath) 
destruction,  and  thou  shalt  die  the  deaths  of  those  that 
are  slain  in  the  midst  of  the  seas." 

Job  33 : 

18,  **He  withdraweth  his  soul  from  (shokhath)  destruction, 

And  his  life  from  perishing  with  a  sword, 
24,  Then  will  he  entreat  his  favor,  and  say, 

Deliver  him  from  going  down  to  (shokhath)  destruction. 
I  have  found  a  ransom. 

28,  He  hath  redeemed  my  soul  from  (shokhath)  destruction 
And  my  life  has  appeared  in  the  light. 

29,  Lo,  all  these  things  performeth  God, 
Time  after  time  with  maa, 

30,  To  bring  back  his  soul  from  destruction,  (shokhath)  ; 
To  enlighten  him  with  the  light  of  the  living."' 

Here  are  twelve  places,  where  a  word  that  means  de- 
strttction^  has  been  improperly  translated  pit^  and  so  far 
is  it  from  implying  a  state  of  conscious  torment,  that  it 
five  times  expressly  points  out  the  destruction  of  the  soul, 
and  in  all  places  imphes  the  destruction  of  being.  See 
also  Prov.  28:  10. 

Three  times  is  the  word  sheol^  which  means  grave^  and 
a  state  of  death^  translated  pit. 

Job  17:  [my  home; 

13, "  When  I  would  hope,  (sheol)  the  mansion  of  the  dead  is 

In  darkness  I  spread  my  bed. 
14,1  say  to  corruption.  Thou  art  my  father! 

My  mother !  and  my  sister !  to  the  worm. 
15, Ah!  where  is  that  which  1  long  for? 

Ay,  that  which  I  long  for — Who  can  see  it  ? 
16,  Into  the  depth  of  sheol  shall  I  descend, 

When  we  are  together  in  the  dust.** 

Common  Version, — ^^  They  shall  go  down  to  the  bars 
of  (sheol)  the  pit,  when  our  rest  together  (i.  e.,  with  cor- 
ruption and  worms)  is  in  the  dust. 

Num.  16  :  30,  33,  "  But  if  the  Lord  make  a  new  thing, 
and  the  earth  open  her  mouth  and  swallow  them  up,  with 


# 


ISO  BIBLE   VS.    TRADmON. 

all  that  appertain  unto  them,  and  they  go  down  quickly 
into  sheol ;  then  shall  ye  understand  that  these  men  have 
provoked  the  Lord.... And  they  and  all  that  appertained 
to  them,  went  down  ahve  into  sheol^  and  the  earth  closed 
upon  them  :  and  they  perished  from  among  the  congre- 
gation." In  these  three  places  where  sJieol  is  translated 
pit^  we  perceive  that  death,  corruption  and  entire  de- 
struction are  meant.  The  word  she^  will  receive  fu  .Iher 
attention.  Ps.  30 :  3,  reads,  "  0  Lord,  thou  hast  brought 
up  Qny  soul  from  (sheol)  the  grave ;  thou  hast  kept  Qiie 
alive,  that  I  should  not  go  down  to  the  [hour)  pit^ 

Ps.  55  :  23,  "  But  thou,  O  God,shalt  bring  them  down 
into  tne  (beair)  deep  place  of  (shokhath)  destruction ; 
bloody  and  deceitful  men  shall  not  live  out  half  their 
days."  Zech.  9  :  11,  "  As  for  thee  also,  by  the  blood  of 
thy  covenant  I  have  sent  forth  thy  prisoners  out  of  the 
(bou7')  pit  wherein  is  no  water."  In  the  word />iY  then, 
we  find  no  indications  of  a  place  of  conscious  torment. 

THE   EOTTOMLJESS   ViT^ 

The  phrase,  "  bottomless  pit,"  is  used  in  our  version 
as  a  synonym  for  the  Greek  word  abussus^  which  is  from 
a,  intensive,  and  bussus  or  butJws^  deep  ;  very  deep ; 
abyss  ;  gulf;  ocean ;  sea  ;  and  metaphorically,  immense ; 
profound ;  a  wilderness.  The  corresponding  word  in 
Hebrew  is  tehouniy  which  occurs.  Gen.  1:2;  7:11;  8  : 
2;  49:  25;  Deut.  33:  13:  Job38:  30;  41:  32;  Ps.  36; 
6;  42:7;  104:6;  Prov.  8:28;  Isa>51:10;  63:13; 
Ez.  26 :  19 ;  31 :  4,  15  ;  Amos  7:4;  Hab.  3  :  10.  Wq 
quote  Gen.  49  :  25  : — 

"  And  by  the  Almighty,  who  shall  bless  thee 

With  blessings  of  heaven  above, 

Blessings  of  the  [tehov/m — ahussus  /  shall  we 

Call  it "  bottomless  pit,"  or  the  sea? 

Or]  deep  that  lieth  under. 

Blessings  of  the  breast  and  the  womb: 

The  blessings  of  thy  father  have  prevailed 

Above  the  blessings  of  the  perpetual  mountains ; 

And  the  desirable  things  of  the  everlasting  hills.** 

A  prophecy  relating  to  the  descendants  of  Josei>h, 
probably  the  Anglo-Saxon  race,  who  should  ultimately 


THE    BOTTOMLESS    PIT.  181 

become  masters  of  the  sea.  In  none  of  the  above  places, 
is  there  any  idea  presented  that  tehoum  is  a  place  of  suf- 
fering ;  it  was  not  the  blessings  of  the  "  bottomless  pit," 
that  the  dying  patriarch  prophetically  conferred  upon 
his  son  Joseph ;  neither  is  the  term  ever  used  as  being 
the  receptacle  of  any  one  class  of  the  dead. 

Ps.  148  :  7,  "  Praise  the  Lord  from  the  earth,  ye  dra- 
gons, and  all  deeps."  Here  the  word  tehoum  occurs  in 
the  plural  form,  and  is  tr.  deeps.  There  must  then  be 
more  than  one  such  place,  and  as  they  or  their  inhabitants 
are  all  called  upon  to  praise  God,  so  the  word  cannot 
mean  a  place  of  punishment.  In  Job  38  :  29,  the  word 
evidently  means  sea  or  ocean.  "  Out  of  whose  womb 
came  the  ice  ?  And  the  hoar  frost  of  heaven,  who  gen- 
dered it  ?  30,  That  the  waters  should  conceal  them- 
selves as  a  stone,  and  the  face  of  the  deep  should  become 
fixed?"  Job  41:31,  Leviathan  "  maketh  (metsoolah) 
the  deep  waters  to  boil  hke  a  pot.. ..one  would  think  the 
tehoum  to  be  hoary."  It  is  here  used  as  a  synonym  to 
deep  waters. 

In  the  N.  T.  the  word  occurs  without  its  intensive 
form  about  fourteen  times  ;  it  is  usually  translated  deep  : 
and  with  the  intensive  form  it  means  very  deep.  We 
give  a  few  examples.  Lk.  5:4,"  Launch  out  into  the 
deep?^  Kom.  11  :  33,  •  Q  the  c/e;?^ A  of  the  riches  both  of 
the  wisdom  and  knowledge  of  God  !"  John  4  :  11,  ''  The 
well  is  dxepy  2  Cor.  1 1  :  25,  "  A  night  and  a  day  I  have 
been  in  the  deep^  We  give  all  the  places  where  the 
emphatic  form  abussos  occurs.  Luke  8  :  31,  "  They  be- 
sought him  that  he  would  not  command  them  to  go  out  in- 
to the  abussos^  Rom.  10:7,  "  Who  shall  descend  into  the 
abussos^  Here  it  seems  used  for  the  grave.  To  make 
abussos  mean  hades  here,  would  be  equal  to,  Who  shall 
ascend  to  heaven  ?  and  who  shall  enter  into  a  state  of 
death  ?  which  would  destroy  the  double  antithesis.  We 
need  not  descend  to  the  grave,  but  only  beheve  "  that 
God  hath  raised  him  from  the  dead,"  or  from  the  grave. 
No  sensible  person  supposes  that  Paul  meant,  we  need 
not  go  down  to  '^  the  bottomless  pit,"  or  to  hell,  to 
find  Christ ! !  Rev.  9  :  1,  "  To  him  was  given  the  key, 
tou  phreatos  tes  abussos^  of  the  very  deep  cavern.  And 
he  opened  the  very  deep  cavern ;  and  there  arose  a 
smoke  out  of  the  cavern,  as  the  smoke  of  a  great  furnace ; 


182  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

and  the  sun  and  the  air  were  darkened  by  reason  of  the 
smoke  of  the  cavern."  11  v,  "And  they  had  a  king 
over  them,  ton  aggelon  tes  abusson^  the  messenger  of 
death,  whose  name  in  the  Hebrew  tongue  is  Destruction ; 
but  in  the  Greek  his  name  is  the  Destroyer."  We  trans- 
late abussos  here  by  death  or  hades.  The  prophecy 
seems  to  refer  to  the  Buonapartean  dynasty.  Napoleon 
is  said  to  have  sent  fifteen  milUons  to  the  grave.  This  is 
the  only  passage  where  abussus  is  joined  with  a  word 
signifying  pit,  or  cavern. 

Rev.  11:7,"  And  when  they  shall  have  finished  their 
testimony,  the  wild  beast  that  ascendeth  out  of  the 
{abussos)  abyss  shall  make  war  against  them,  and  shall 
overcome  them,  and  kill  them."  Kev.  17:8,"  The  wild 
beast  that  thou  sawest,  which  was,  but  is  not,  will  yet 
ascend  out  of  theabyss^  (abussos)  and  go  into  destruction ; 
and  they  that  dwell  upon  the  earth,  (whose  names  have 
not  been  written  in  the  book  of  life  from  the  foundation 
of  the  world,)  will  view  with  wonder  and  admiration, 
w^hen  they  see,  that  the  wild  beast  that  was,  but  is  not, 
will  yet  be  present." 

Rev.  20  :  1,  "  And  I  saw  an  angel  come  down  from 
heaven,  having  the  key  of  the  0^5505,.... and  he  cast  the 
dragon  into  the  abussos... X\\2Lt  he  should  deceive  the  na- 
tions no  more."  We  have  now  quoted  all  the  places 
where  abussos  appears.  In  no  place  can  it  be  found  that 
wicked  men  are  cast  into  the  abussos^  in  any  other  sense 
than  into  the  grave ;  neither  does  a  pit  without  a  bottom 
seem  a  suitable  place  for  confinement,  nor  for  torment- 
ing the  living  souls  of  dead  men ;  or  as  dead  men  and 
dead  souls  are  synonomous  expressions,  we  are  justified 
in  writing  it  so  as  to  confute  itself  Abussos  is  not  a 
suitable  place  to  torment  the  living  souls  of  dead  souls, 
or  the  dead  living  souls  ! !  Revelation  speaks  of  the  rise 
of  two  great  powers :  the  Dragon  deceives  the  habitable 
earth,  the  Roman  Empire ;  but  the  False  Prophet,  the 
propounder  of  false  doctrines.  Rev.  19  :  20,  "  deceiveth 
my  people^''  tous  emous:  Vatican  and  Moscow.  So  the 
power  that  deceives  the  Roman  Empire  is  difierent  from 
those  professed  teachers  of  these  latter  days  who  "  de- 
ceiveth mine,  or  my  people"  ;  by  preaching  peradventure 
the  very  fables  we  are  opposing.     Will  the  reader  pon- 


THE   GRAVE.  183 

der  and  mark  these  popular  preachers  of  false  doctrines, 
and  look  for  them  around  him  ? 

THE    GRAVE. 

The  words  rendered  grave  in  the  0.  T.  are — I.  Kever^ 
a  grave  or  cavern,  from  kovar  to  cover,  to  bury,  to 
hide  ;  2.  Ai  or  ee^  a  ruin,  waste,  or  heap  ;  3.  Shokhath, 
destruction ;  and  4.  Sheol^  which  originally  meant  the 
grave,  but  afterwards  became  a  general  term,  signifying 
the  state  of  death.  Ai  is  translated  grave  only  in  Job 
30 :  24  ;  but  in  the  margin  it  is  rendered  heap,  Shok- 
hath  is  translated  grave  in  Job  33 :  22.  Kever  is 
translated  grave  in  about  forty-seven  places :  Genesis 
35:  20;  Exodus   14:    11;    2  Samuel  3  :  32 ;    19 :  37 ; 

1  Kings   13:   30;    14 :  13  ;    2  Kings  22:   20;    23:  6; 

2  Chron.  34 :  4,  28  ;  Job  3  :  22  ;  5 :  26 ;  10:19;  14  :  13  ; 
17:  1;  21:  32;  Ps.  88:5,  11;  141:  7;  Isa.  53:9;  65: 
4;  Jer.  8:1;  20  :  17  ;  26  :  23  ;  Ez.  32  :  22,  23,  24,  25, 
26;  37  :  12,  13;  39  :  11 ;  Na.  1 :  14.  As  only  some  of 
the  dead  are  buried  in  their  graves,  (keverim,  plural  of 
kever,)  but  all  the  dead  are  in  the  state  of  death,  of  un- 
consciousness, all  the  dead  are  said  to  be  in  sheol.  That 
sheol  does  not  in  the  strictness  of  language  mean  grave, 
we  shall  demonstrate  under  that  word.  For  the  present 
we  give  but  one  instance  where  sheol  is  mistranslated 
grave.  Gen.  37  :  33,  35,  "  And  he  knew  it ;  and  said, 
my  son's  coat :  an  evil  beast  hath  devoured  him  :  Joseph 
is  without  doubt  reyit  inpieces„„And  he  said.  For  I  will 
go  down  into  sheol  unto  my  son  mourning."  Mark,  the 
pious  patriarch  says,  Joseph  is  torn  in  pieces,  is  devoured  ; 
yet  he  expects  to  be  with  him  in  sheol :  sheol  is  there- 
fore neither  the  grave  nor  hell,  as  now  understood,  but 
the  state  of  death. 

We  shall  have  occasion  to  notice  only  one  of  the  Greek 
words  which  are  translated  grave,  namely,  hades  in  1 
Cor.  15  :  55.  See  Hades.  Be  it  remembered  tha-t  the 
grave  never  represents  a  place  of  suflfering ;  but  of  re- 
pose, of  silence,  of  forgetfulness ;  a  place  where  there  is 
no  knowledge,  nor  device ;  where  all  are  indiscriminately 
consigned  to  nothingness  and  oblivion ;  and  to  the  entire 
annihilation  of  being,  to  all  whom  Christ  has  not  ran- 
somed from  the  grave  by  a  resurrection  from  the  uncon- 


184  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

sciousness  of  death  to  an  everlasting  existence  in  his 
kingdom. 

THE    PRISON. 

The  word  prison  does  not  denote  a  receptacle  in  which 
the  wicked  will  be  tormented  for  ever.  It  sometimes  oc- 
curs in  the  sense  of  grave  :  as  in  Isa.  42  :  1-7,  "  Behold 
my  servant  (the  Christ,)  whom  I  uphold  ;  mine  elect  in 
whom  my  soul  delighteth.  I,  the  Lord,  have  called  thee 
in  righteousness,  and  will  hold  thy  hand,  and  will  keep 
thee,  and  give  thee  for  a  covenant  of  the  people,  for  a 
light  of  the  Gentiles ;  to  open  the  blind  eyes  (of  the  liv- 
ing) to  bring  out  the  prisoners  (the  dead,)  from  the  pri- 
son (the  grave,)  [and]  them  that  recline  in  darkness  out 
of  the  prison  house  (the  grave)."  The  same  general 
sentiment  is  found  in  Isa.  49  :  8,  "  In  an  acceptable  time 
have  I  heard  thee.... and  I  will  preserve  thee,  and  give 
thee  for  a  covenant  of  the  people,  to  estabhsh  the  earth, 
to  cause  the  desolate  heritages  to  be  inherited  ;  that  thou 
may  est  say  to  the  prisoners,  (those  who  are  in  graves,) 
go  forth  ;  to  them  that  are  in  darkness,  show  yourselves." 
Ps.  142  :  7,  "  Bring  my  soul  out  of  prison  (the  grave) 
that  I  may  praise  thy  name."  Isa.  61  :  1,  "  The  Spirit 
of  the  Lord  God  is  upon  me ;  because  the  Lord  hath 
anointed  me  to  preach  good  tidings  to  the  meek ;  he 
hath  sent  me  to  bind  up  the  broken  hearted,  to  proclaim 
liberty  to  the  captives,  and  the  opening  of  the  prison 
(the  grave)  to  them  that  are  bound  (therein) ;  to  proclaim 
the  acceptable  year  of  the  Lord,  cmd  the  day  of  ven- 
geance of  our  God."  Luke  4  :  18.  Ps.  69,  "  For  the 
Lord  heareth  the  poor  and  despiseth  not  his  prisoners." 
Speaking  of  high  ones  and  kings,  God  says  in  Isa.  24: 
22,  "  And  they  shall  be  gathered  together  as  prisoners 
are  gathered  in  the  pit:"  may  refer  to  their  being 
collected  in  the  valleys  of  Jeshoshaphat  prior  to  their 
destruction  in  Gehenna :  or,  being  brought  down  to 
death,  be  "  visited"  with  a  resurrection ;  and  then  "  the 
Lord  of  armies,  shall  reign  in  Mount  Zion." 


185 


CHAPTEE  XL 


EXAMINATION  OP  SHEOL  AND  HADES HELL. 

The  most  important  words  in  this  connection  are  the 
Hebrew  word  sheol^  and  its  Greek  counterpart  hacle^. 
We  intend  to  demonstrate  that  neither  of  these  words 
ever  mean  a  definite  place,  much  less  a  place  where  per- 
sons are  tormented.  Professor  Stuart  says  sheol  has  been 
derived  from  shoal^  to  ask^  crave^  demand^  require^  seek 
for^  etc ;  it  is  equal  to  the  Latin,  orcus  rapax — insatiable 
sepulchre,  the  grave.  We  give  a  few  instances  that  bear 
out  this  meaning. 

Prov.  27  :  20,  "  Sheol ^  and  destruction  are  never 
(sovaia)  satisfied  ;  so  the  eyes  of  man  are  never  {sovaia) 
satisfied."  Sheol  tr,  hell.  Prov.  30 :  15,  "  The  horse 
leech  hath  two  daughters,  crying,  Give,  give.  There  are 
three  things  that  are  never  satisfied,  yea,  four  things  say 
not.  It  is  enough:  Sheol;  and  the  barren  womb;  the 
earth  that  is  not  filled  with  water ;  and  the  fire  that  saith 
not.  It  is  ENOUGH."  Sheol  is  here  tr.  the  grave.  Isa.  5  : 
14,  "  Therefore  sheol  hath  enlarged  herself,  and  opened 
her  mouth  without  measure  :  and  their  glory,  and  their 
multitude,  and  their  pomp,  and  he  that  rejoiceth,  shall 
descend  into  it."  Hab.  2  :  5,  "  Yea,  also,  because  he 
transgresseth  by  wine,  he  is  a  proud  man,  neither  keepetli 
at  home,  who  enlargcth  his  desire  as  sheol,  and  is  as 
death,  and  cannot  be  satisfied,  but  gathereth  unto  hiin 
ail  nations,  and  heapeth  unto  him  all  people."  These 
examples  confirm  the  craving  nature  K^i  sheol :  and  wliilo 
there  are  mortal  persons  upon  the  earth,  the  grave  will 
be  asking  for  them.     The  obvious  sense  of  sheol^  is  the 


186  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

grave  in  a  general  sense;  that  is,  the  state  of  death. 
The  dominion  of  the  dead,  into  which  the  righteous  and 
the  wicked  ahke  are  cast,  and  in  which  they  both  alike 
repose.  It  is  not  a  specific  place^  but  a  state.  Some 
only  are  in  any  kind  of  grave ;  but  all  are  in  sheol^  the 
state  of  death.  Sheol  never  occurs  in  the  plural  ;  so  if 
in  going  down  into  a  specified  place,  or  grave,  one  person 
is  said  to  go  into  sheol ;  and  in  going  down  into  another 
specified  place^  or  grave,  another  person  is  said  to  be  in 
sheol ;  as  there  is  but  07ie  sheol^  and  these  two  persons 
are  in  different  places ;  therefore  sheol  cannot  be  a  place, 
but  must  be  a  state  :  they  are  both  in  sheol^  and  both  are 
in  the  state  of  death. 

In  the  German  Bible,  sheol  is  translated  holle^  which 
seems  to  be  very  much  like  our  old  Saxon  word  helle^  or 
hell — the  definition  of  which  see  in  another  place — in  all 
places  excepting  Gen.  37 :  35,  where  it  is  translated  ^  die 
gruhe^  grave ^  tomb^  or  sepulchre ;  and  in  Gen.  42 :  38, 
*  die  grube^ ;  2  Sam.  22  :  6,  '  schmerzen  des  todes^  pains 
of  death.  But  observe,  Luther  has  frequently  rendered 
the  Hebrew  word  bour^  a  pit,  by  the  Gennan  word 
holle:  as  in  Ps.  28  :  1 ;  88  :  4;  Prov.  28  :  17;  Isa.  14: 
19;  and  Ezek.  31:  14.  But  then,  Luther  did  not  be- 
lieve in  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  nor  in  its  separate 
conscious  existence,  nor  in  everlasting  torments,  and 
therefore  did  not  perceive  a^y  great  difference  of  mean- 
ing between  the  grave,  and  hell,  and  the  pit.  In  his 
Defence,  Prop.  27th,  published  1520,  he  classes  the  *  im- 
7aortality  of  the  souV  "  with  all  those  monstrous  opinions 
to  be  found  in  the  Roman  dunjjhill  of  decretals."  If  he 
had  entertained  any  idea  that  any  of  his  degenerate  suc- 
cessors would  have  given  to  his  word  holle.,  any  other 
meaning  than  what  is  implied  in  a  state  of  death,  that 
word  w^ould  not  have  found  a  place  in  his  version. 
Holle  (we  believe)  means  a  place  covered,  or  concealed. 

The  learned  Tremellius,  who  was  a  Jew  by  birth,  and 
professor  of  Hebrew  at  Sedan,  where  he  died  in  1 580, 
translated  the  Syriac  Version  of  the  Bible,  the  oldest 
version  extant,  into  Latin.  He  uniformly  rendered  the 
Syriac  synonym  for  sheol  into  Latin,  by  sepulchrum^  i, 
o,  u^  (the  different  endings  showing  only  the  different 
grammatical  construction,)  which  means  the  sepulchre, 
grave,  or  tomb,  excepting  in  one  single  instance,  Ps.  49 : 


EXAMINATION    OF    SHEOL   AND    HADES.  187 

14,  last  clause,  where  he  has  rendered  it,  infernus^  hell^ 
because  he  thought  that  the  wicked  could  not  be  con- 
signed to  the  same  place  as  that  from  which  the  soul  of 
the  Psalmist  was  redeemed.  Yet  he  acknowledges  that 
sheol^  in  most  places,  meant  the  general  receptacle  of  the 
dead. 

In  the  French  Version,  the  word  sheol  is  usually  trans- 
lated sepulchre,  and  only  once  enfer^  hell^  in  Job  11:8, 
where  it  has  no  relation  to  the  dead,  but  is  contrasted 
with  the  height  of  heaven. 

In  the  Greek  Septuagint,  the  version  in  use  in  our 
Savior's  time,  sheol  is  rendered  hades^  the  unseen^  sixty 
times  out  of  sixty-three;  twice  by  thanatos^  death^  viz., 
in  2  Sam.  22 :  6,  and  Pro  v.  23  :  14 ;  and  once  by  buthros^ 
pit,\n  Ez.  32:  19,  21. 

As  the  Apocrypha  is  not  found  in  Hebrew  but  only 
in  Greek,  and  as  the  Septuagint  has  usually  made  hades 
the  symbol  of  sheol,  we  give  those  places  where  hades  is 
found,  as  probably  showing  where  sheol  was  in  the  He- 
brew original.  The  word  occurs  twenty  times,  and  is 
translated  hell  eight  times,  viz.,  2  Esd.  2  :  29  ;  4:8;  8  : 
53 ;  Tob.  13:2;  Wisd.  17:14;  Eccl.  21  :  10 ;  51  :  5,  6  ; 
and  grave  twelve  times,  viz.,  2  Esd.  4:41;  Tob.  3  :  10 ; 
Est.  13:7;  Eccl.  14 :  12,  16 ;  17  :  27 ;  28  :  18,  21  ;  41  : 
4;  Bar.  3:11;  Dan.  3  :  66  ;  2  Mac.  6  :  23. 

Sheol  occurs  sixty-four  times  in  the  0.  T. ;  three  times 
it  is  translated  pit  /  thirty  times  grave  ;  and  thirty-one 
times  hell.  It  would  be  passing  strange,  if  the  same 
word  meant  a  particular  place,  where  a  single  soul  cor- 
rupted in  unconscious  silence,  and  also  a  receptacle  where 
all  the  wicked  souls  or  persons  were  congregated  and 
tormented,  and  at  the  same  time,  a  place  where  all  the 
righteous  dead  were  congregated  in  conscious  enjoyment. 
Originally,  the  word  seems  to  have  meant  the  grave  ;  but 
as  all  dead  men  are  not  in  graves,  it  came  to  mean  the 
state  of  death  in  general.  The  burned  men  and  the 
buried  men  are  equally  in  sheol,  whether  they  be  right- 
eous or  whether  they  be  wicked. 

Sheol  is  translated  j9^^,  Job  17  :  16 ;  Num.  16  :  30  and 
33v.     See  article  Pit. 

Sheol  is  translated  grave,  Gen.  37  :  35  ;  42  :  38  ;  44 
29,  31 ;  1  Sam.  2:6;  1  Kings  2 :  6,  9  ;  Job  7  :  9  ;  14 
13;  17:13;  21:13;  24 :  19 ;  Ps.  6 :  5 ;  30:  3;  31:  17 


188  BIBLE   VS.  TRADITION. 

49  :  14,  15  ;  88  :  3  ;  89  :  48  ;  141  :  7  ;  Prov.  1  :  12 ;  30  : 
16 ;  Ecc.  9:10;  Cant.  8:6;  Isa.  14:11;  38 :  10,  18 ; 
Ezk.  31  :  15  ;  Hos.  13  :  14,  twice. 

Sheol  is  translated  hell,  prcyperly^  as  a  general  thing, 
IF  intended  tc^  mean  the  same  as  the  old  Saxon  word  heil^ 
the  covered  receptacle  of  all  the  dead,  where  the  good 
and  the  bad  repose  together  in  a  state  of  unconscious- 
ness, or  as  defined  under  the  Saxon  word  hell^  on  an- 
other page ;  but  very  imjirojierly^  and  very  shamefully, 
IF  intended  to  be  a  symbol  of  the  '  orthodox'  and  tradi- 
tionary hell,  as  a  place  of  conscious  torment  for  the  wicked 
only.  But  w^e,  without  the  sHghtest  reservation,  con- 
demn the  translators  ;  for  they  have  evidently  endeavor- 
ed to  obscure  the  true  sense  of  the  word  sheol^  and  to 
uphold  the  traditionary  meaning  of  hell  at  the  expense 
of  truth  and  uniformity.  Had  sheol  been  uniformly 
translated  pit^  or  grave^  or  hell^  or  the  state  of  the  deady 
or  even  the  mansions  of  the  dead^  no  such  absurd  idea, 
as  that  of  a  place  of  conscious  torment,  could  ever  have 
been  associated  with  it. 

Sheol  is  translated  hell  in  the  following  places,  viz. 
Deut.  32  :  22 ;  2  Sam.  22 :  6  ;  Job  1 1 :  8  ;  26  :  6 ;  Ps 
9:  17;  16:  10;  18:  5;  55:  15;  86:  13;  116:  3;  139 
8  ;  Pro.  5:5;  7 :  27  ;  9:18;  15  :  1 1,  24  ;  23  :  14  ;  27 
20  ;  Isa.  5:14;  14  :  9,  15  ;  28  :  15, 18  ;  57  :  9  ;  Eze.  31 
16,  17 ;  32  :  21,  27 ;  Am.  9:2;  Jonah  2:2;  Hab.  2 :  5. 

Sheol  is  the  only  word  that  is  translated  hell  in  the 
0.  T.,  and  as  we  shall  see,  it  ahvays  means  the  state  of 
death,  the  grave,  and  corruption  ;  and  never  can  mean  a 
place  of  conscious  torment.  The  learned  George  Camp- 
bell observes,  that  the  word  sheol  in  the  0.  T.  means  no 
more  than  kever^  the  grave^  or  sepulchre,  excepting  that 
it  has  a  more  general  sense.  Kever^  we  have  seen,  is 
never  translated  hell. 

To  show  more  conspicuously  the  glaring  absurdity  of 
considering  the  Hebrew  sheol ^  as  a  burning  hell  for  the 
torment  of  the  wdcked,  w^e  adduce  sheol  as  being  the 
name  of  the  first  king  of  Israel.  In  later  times  this  name 
has  been  differently  pointed,  thereby  making  a  little  dif 
ference  in  the  sound  of  the  letters,  without  altering  in 
the  least  degree  their  meaning,  and  is  written  Saul.  See 
the  meaning  of  Saul  in  Cruden's  Concordance,  p.  716. 
This  caps  the  climax.     It  will  be  recollected  that  the 


EXAMIMATION  OF  SHEOL  AND  HADES.        189 

chief  apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  being  a  Hebrew  of  the 
Hebrews,  was  named  Saul.  But  how  would  it  shock  a 
Christian  congregation  to  hear  a  child,  at  baptism, 
named  Hell!  Yet  when  Hebrew  children  were  brought 
before  the  Lord,  at  circumcision,  many  of  their  names 
were  called  Sheol^  or  Saul !  And  as  the  Hebrews  con- 
sidered this  an  appropriate  name  in  the  days  of  the  apos- 
tles, it  is  impossible  to  believe  that  they  ever  associated 
with  it  the  idea  of  the  comparatively  modern  invented 
and  *  orthodox'  hell  1! 

Where  the  word  hell  is  found  in  the  common  version, 
grave  is  often  found  in  the  margin,  and  the  reverse ; 
showing  that  the  translators  regarded  either  of  these  two 
words  as  a  suitable  representative  for  the  word  sheol ; 
yet  have  they  availed  themselves  of  every  opportunity  to 
insert  the  word  hell^  where  it  would  favor  the  popular 
tradition.  We  give  a  few  instances  where  the  margin 
and  the  text  differ.  Ps.  55  :  15,  *'  Let  death  seize  upon 
them,  and  let  them  go  down  quickly  into  (sheol)  hell?"^ 
Margin^  the  grave.  The  meaning  of  both  clauses  is 
similar  :  Let  them  die.  That  his  enemies  should  be  hor- 
ribly tormented  for  ever,  was  a  more  suitable  desire  for 
Moloch  than  for  David.  Ps.  86:  13,  "Thou  hast  de- 
livered my  soul  from  the  lowest  {sheol)  hell, "^"^  Margin, 
grave.  Assemblies  of  violent  men  had  sought  after  the 
soul  of  David,  the  life  and  being  of  David  ;  but  God  had 
delivered  his  soul,  himself,  from  the  *  lowest  sheol^  from 
the  most  terrible  and  cruel  death.  Jonah  2:2,"  Out  of 
the  belly  of  (sheol)  hell  cried  I,  and  thou  heardest  my 
voice.*'  Margin,  grave.  Sheol  here,  a  figure  of  death. 
Isa.  14:9,  "  (Sheol)  hell  from  beneath  is  moved  for  thee 
to  meet  thee  at  thy  coming."  Margin,  ^rat'e.  11  v, 
"  Thy  pomp  is  brought  down  to  the  (sheol)  graveJ^  15 
V,  "  Yet  thou  shalt  be  brought  down  to  (sheol)  hell,  to 
the  sides  of  the  (hour)  pit,'*''  18  v,  "  All  the  kings  of  the 
nations,  even  all  of  them,  lie  in  glory,  every  one  in  his 
own  house,"  (or  separate  sepulchre).  19  v,  "  But  thou 
art  cast  out  of  thy  (kever)  grave^  like  an  abominable 
branch,  and  as  the  raiment  of  those  that  are  slain,  thrust 
through  with  the  sword,  that  go  down  to  the  stones  of 
the  (hour)  pit ;  as  a  carcass  trodden  under  feet.  Thou 
shalt  not  be  joined  with  them  in  (kevooroh^  alhed  to  kever) 
burial,  because  thou  hast  destroyed  thy  land,  and  slain 


190  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

thy  people  :  the  seed  of  evil  doers  shall  never  be  renown- 
ed." If  *  going  into  sheoV  and  *  going  into  the  grave'  are 
identical  and  synonymous  expressions  in  verses  1 1  and 
15,  and  are  made  to  agree  with  house  or  sepulchre^  and 
kever^  and  hour  Wi^  grave ^  and  pit^  v.  18  and  19;  then 
certainly  sheol  in  v.  11  means  the  same,  and  all  imply  a 
state  of  death.  And  going  into  sheol^  and  going  into  a 
grave  cut  out  of  the  sides  of  the  pit,  equally  expresses 
only  a  state  of  death.  Mark  particularly  the  reading  of 
V.  11,  "Thy  pomp  is  brought  down  to  ^^eo/,  and  the 
noise  of  thy  viols  :  the  worm  is  spread  under  thee,  and 
the  worms  cover  thee."  But  this  sheol  was  in  '  the  sides 
of  the  pit.'  In  Ezek.  32  :  23,  kever^  the  grave,  is  like- 
wise in  the  '  sides  of  the  pit'  Whose  (kevoreem^  plural 
oikever^  graves.^  are  set  in  the  sides  of  the  (hour)  pit." 
From  this  we  likewise  prove,  that  kever^  the  grave^  and 
pit^  and  prison^  all  imply  the  same  thing,  and  that  sheol^ 
hell^  if  you  please,  implies  no  more,  only  as  being  a  more 
general  expression. 

In  nearly  all  the  thirty-three  places  where  sheol  is  ren- 
dered grave  and  pit^  it  would  be  extremely  absurd  to 
call  sheol  hell.  Nevertheless  we  will  call  sheol  hell — the 
very  orthodox  '  hell  where  the  wicked  are  tormented  for 
ever' — seeing  ye  will  have  it  so,  just  for  a  little  while, 
only  that  you  may  the  better  perceive  its  absurdity. 
Gen.  37  :  35,  Jacob  said,  "  For  I  will  go  down  into  {sheol) 
hell,  unto  my  son  mourning."  Jacob  supposed  that  Jo- 
seph was  torn  to  pieces,  yet  in  sheol.  Did  Jacob  believe 
that  his  son  Joseph  was  in  hell^  and  that  he  would  soon 
follow  ?  Remember  we  are  justified  in  calling  sheol  hell 
here,  if  the  translators  are  in  thirty-one  other  places. 
Gen.  42  :  28,  Jacob  again  said,  "Then  shall  ye  bring 
down  my  grey  hairs  with  sorrow  to  (sheol)  hell?''  The 
same  words  occur  in  Ch.  44  :  29,  31.  Did  the  sons  of 
Jacob  think  that  they  would  bring  down  their  father 
with  his  grey  hairs  to  hell  to  meet  there  his  son  Joseph  ? 
1  Kings  2 :  6,  9,  "  Let  not  his  hoar  head  go  down  to 
i^sheol)  hell  in  peace.. ..But  his  hoar  head  bring  thou  down 
to  (sheol)  hell  with  blood."  David  gave  these  directions 
to  Solomon  concerning  Joab  and  Shemei ;  Did  David 
believe  that  the  hoar  heads  of  these  two  would  go  in 
"jt?eacc"  into  a  hell  of  torments^  if  not  slain  by  violence  ? 
He  says  not  a  word  where  their  "  immortal  ghosts" 


EXAMINATION   OF   SHEOL    AND    HADES.  191 

were  to  go,  Ps.  88  :  3.  The  Psalmist  said,  "  My  soul  is 
full  of  troubles;  and  my  life  draweth  mgh  unto  (skeol) 
hell.'''  Ps.  89 :  48,  "  What  man  is  he  that  liveth  and 
shall  not  see  death  ?  Shall  he  deliver  his  soul  from  the 
hand  of  (sheol)  hell  ^"  If  you  will  insist  that  sheol  means 
hell,  then  no  man  can  save  his  soul  from  helL  Ecc,  9  : 
10,  "  Whatsoever  thy  hand  lindeth  to  do,  do  it  with  thy 
might ;  for  there  is  no  w^ork,  nor  device,  nor  knowledge, 
nor  wisdom,  in  heU,,  [sheol,)  whither  thou  goest."  If 
sheol  means  hell,  then  all  go  to  hell ;  but  there  is  no 
knowledge  there,  so  the  damned  "  know  not  anything  ;'' 
and,  of  course,  know  no  suffering ;  and  so  the  hell  of  the 
Bible,  is  not  the  theological  hell.  Isa.  38:  10,  "  I  shall 
go  to  the  gates  of  (be  under  the  power  of)  hell,  {sheol). 
1  am  deprived  of  the  residue  of  my  years."  Well  might 
the  pious  Plezekiah  have  prayed  that  he  might  not  die, 
if  he  had  thought  that  he  would  go  to  a  hell  of  torments  ; 
but  no,  he  thought  it  would  terminate  his  years,  his  exis- 
tence, till  the  resurrection.  Ps.  30 :  3,  "  O  Lord,  thou 
hast  brought  up  my  soul  from  hell,  {sheol) y  Hosea  13  : 
14,  "I  will  ransom  them  from  the  power  of  hell,  {sheol)  ; 
I  will  redeem  them  from  death :  O  death,  I  will  be  thy 
plagues  ;  0  hell,  {sheol,)  I  will  be  thy  destruction."  But 
if  God  destroys  hell,  the  damned  must  either  escape  or 
be  destroyed  with  it.  But  then.  How  can  the  endless 
misery  doctrine  be  established  ?  Ps.  49  :  12,  **  Neverthe- 
less man  being  in  honor  abideth  not :  he  is  hke  the  beasts 
that  perish.  14  v,  Like  sheep  they  are  laid  in  hell,  {sheol): 
death  shall  feed  on  them  ;  and  the  upright  shall  have  do- 
minion over  them  in  the  morning  (of  the  resurrection  ;) 
and  their  beauty  shall  consume  in  hell,  {sheol,)  from  their 
dwelling.  But  God  will  redeem  my  soul  from  the  power 
oi  hell,  {sheol) :  for  he  shall  receive  me."  The  Psalmist, 
and  the  wicked,  and  sheep,  go  together  to  hell  {sheol)  : 
but  God  will  ultimately  redeem  the  Psalmist  therefrom. 
But  what  have  sheep  done  that  they,  poor  things,  should 
be  tormented  for  ever  ?  But  suppose  sheol  should  mean 
the  state  of  death,  of  unconsciousness  and  corruption, 
then  how  natural  and  easy  to  comprehend  the  meaning 
of  all  these  quotations.  Ps.  6:4,"  Eeturn,  O  Lord,  de- 
liver my  soul :  Oh  save  me  for  thy  mercies'  sake.  For 
in  death,  there  is  no  remembrance  of  thee :  in  hell, 
{sheol,)  who  shall  give  thee  thanks  ?"     Here  death  and 


192  BIBLE   VS.   TRADmON, 

sheol  are  made  interchangable  and  synonymous,  and  con- 
stitute a  state  in  which  there  is  no  memory  nor  giving  of 
thanks.  Now,  if  sheol  means  hdl  in  thirty*one  other 
places,  then  sheol  means  hell  here,  for  it  cannot  bear  the 
opposite  meaning  of  a  place  of  conscious  torment  for  the 
wicked ;  a  place  of  conscious  enjoyment  for  the  righteous ; 
and  likewise  an  opposite  meaning  of  a  place,  the  grave, 
where  the  dead,  corrupt  in  unconscious  silence  !  !  Who 
will  believe  such  absurdities  ?  As  the  translators,  biased 
by  their  pagan  traditions,  believed  in  the  immortahty, 
and  in  the  separate  conscious  existence  of  the  soul,  so 
they  must  necessarily  provide  a  place  for  their  reception  : 
hence  the  fables  that  the  wicked  dead  are  now  torment- 
ed in  hell,  and  the  righteous  dead  are  now  in  a  state  of 
gloritication  in  heaven,  or  paradise,  or  somewhere  else* 
It  is  a  pity  that  they  could  not  find  a  more  accommoda- 
ting word  that  could  be  more  effectually  twisted  into 
accordance  with  their  traditions,  than  this  same  w^ord 
sheol  a 

Calsio's  Concordance  places  sheol  in  Isa.  7  :  11.  It 
may  have  read  so  in  some  copies.  The  common  copies 
do  indeed  contain  the  same  w^ord  as  to  the  arrangement 
of  the  letters,  but  it  is  now  made  to  read  differently  so 
as  to  mean  a  request^  a  petition^  by  a  little  difference  in 
the  jjointing  of  the  letters,  ^'  Ask  thee  a  sign  of  the 
Lord  thy  God  ;  ask  it  either  in  the  depth,  or  in  the 
heio^ht  above."  There  is  very  little  difference  in  the 
original  in  the  meaning  of  a  request,  a  Jiell,  a.nd  a.  petition  ; 
and  sheol  only  asks  for  the  mortal  living  that  they  may 
die. 

Is  it  surprising,  that  in  a  volume  abounding  with  in- 
stances of  the  most  sublime  and  boldest  poetry,  where 
the  floods  and  the  mountains,  and  the  hills  and  the  val- 
leys, are  made  to  '•  clap  their  Jiands  and  shout  for  joy  ;' 
W'here  trees  and  birds  converse  ;  where  the  blood  oi 
Christ  '  speaks,'  and  the  blood  of  Abel  finds  a  *  voice,' 
and  ^  calls  for  vengeance'  from  the  ground,  that  had  open- 
ed *  her  moutK  to  receive  it ;  where  inanimate  nature  is 
endowed  with  life  and  motion ;  is  it  surprising,  we  say, 
that  sheol  and  its  unconscious  inhabitants,  should  occa- 
sionally be  endowed  with  life  and  animation  ?  and  that 
sometimes  sheol  should  be  represented  as  a  large  man- 
sion ?  and  so  indeed  we  find  it.     These  fine  touches  of 


•EXAMINATIOK    O'P    SHEOL    AND    HADES.  193 

po^t^j  find  a  parallel  in  the  parable  of  the  Eich  Man  and 
Lazarus,  in  which  the  Ri<;h  Man  lifts  up  his  eyes  and 
<jonverses  in  hades.     We  give  illustrations : 

Isa.  5  :  1 1,  ^•'  Wo  unto  Chem  that  rise  up  early  in  the 
JBorning,  that  they  may  follow  strong  ddnk....that  regard 
3iot  the  wo^k  of  the  lyord.,,. Therefore  my  people  are 
.gone  into  captivity,  because  they  have  no  knowledge  :,., 
14  V,  ^'  Therefore  sheal  hath  enlarged  her  (nephesh)  soul, 
and  opened  her  mouth  without  measure  :  and  their  glory 
:and  their  multitude,  afid  their  pomp,  and  he  that  re- 
Joiceth,  shall  d-escend  into  it."  Isa.  14  :  4,  "  Thou  shalt 
take  up  this  (moshol)  parable  against  the  king  of  Baby- 
lon, and  say.-  How  liath  the  oppressor  ceased,  the  golden 
<3ity  ceased  \  The  Lord  hath  broken  the  staff  o^  the 
wicked,  and  the  sceptre  of  the  rulers.... Yea,  the  fir-trees 
rejoice  at  thee,  and  the  cedars  of  Lebanon,  saying,  Since 
thou  art  laid  down,  no  feller  is  come  up  against  us.  9  v, 
Sheol  from  beneath  is  moved  for  thee  to  meet  thee  ^t  thy 
•coming:  it  «tirreth  up  tlie  dead  fo^r  thee,  even  all  the 
<chief  ones^of  the  earth:  it  -hath  raised  up  from  their 
thrones  all  the  kings  of  the  nations.  All  they  shall  speak 
:and  say  unto  thee,  Art  thou  become  w^eak  as  we  ?  Art 
thou  become  like  unto  us  ?  Thy  pomp  is  brought  down 
to  sheol^  and  the  noise  of  thy  viols  z  the  loonti  is  spread 
under  thee^  and  the  worms  coven'  thee.,^!YhoVi  hast  said  in 
thy  heart,  I  will  ascend  into  heaven ;..,.! 4  v,  I  will  ascend 
^bove  the  heights  of  clouds ;  I  will  be  like  the  Most 
High,  15  V,  Yet  thou  shalt  be  brought  down  to  sheol^ 
to  the  sides  of  the  (hour)  pit."  Isa.  28  :  15,  "  Because  ye 
have  said,  we  have  made  a  covenant  with  deathj  and  with 
^sheolwoQ  we  at  agreement ;  whea  the  ©verflowing  scourge 
shall  pass  through,  it  shall  not  come  unto  us :  for  we  have 
fnade  lies  out  refuge : — the  hail  shall  sweep  away  the 
^refuge  of  lies  ;...,18  v,  And  your  covenant  with  death 
«hall  be  disannulled,  and  your  agreement  with  sheol  shall 
^not  stand -^  when  the  overflowing  scourge  .shall  pass 
through,  then  ye  shall  be  trodden  down  by  it."  Here 
•are  two  parallelisms  in  which  death  and  sheol  are  made 
equal  to  each  other.  To  deprive  a  person  of  his  life,  and 
Kjonsciousness ;  and  to  send  him  to  sheol ;  mean  exactly 
the  same  thing, 

Ezek.  3i  :  2,  "  Son  of  Man,  speak  unto  Pharaoh,  king 
of  Egypt,  and  to  his  multitude....  10  v,  Because  thou  hast 


194  BIBLE    VS,   TKAD-rriON^ 

lifted  up  thyself  in  h®ight..„ll  v^  I  have  therefore  de- 
livered him  into  the  hand  of  the  mighty  one  of  the  hea- 
then.... 12  V,  And  strangers,  the  terrible  of  the  nations, 
have  cut  him  oC..14  v,^  To  the  end  that  none  of  all  the 
trees  by  the  waters^  exalt  themselves  for  their  height.,., 
for  they  are  all  delivered  unto  deaths  to  the  nether  parts, 
of  the  earthy  in  the  midst  of  the  children  of  men,  with 
them  that  go  down  to  the  pit  [boiiry  15  v,.  Thus  saiuh 
the  Lord  God ;  In  the  day  when  he  went  down  to  {sheol) 
to  the  state  of  deaths  I  caused  a  mourning  :„..and  I  caused 
Lebanon  to  mourn  for  him^  and  all  the  trees  of  the  field 
fainted  for  him.  16  v,  I  made  the  nations  to  shake  at 
the  sound  of  his  fall^  when  I  cast  him  dow^n  to  (sheol) 
hell^  with  them  that  desceml  into  the  (hour)  pit :  and  all 
the  trees  of  Eden...  shall  be  comforted  in  the  nether  parts 
of  the  earth,  17  v^  They  ako  went  down  into  [sheol)  hell 
with  him,  unto  them  that  be  slain  with  the  sword ;  and 
they  that  were  his  arm,  that  dw^elt  under  his  shadow  in 
the  midst  of  the  heathen.  18  v,  To  whom  art  thou  like 
in  glory  and  in  greatness  among  the  trees  of  Eden  ? 
Yet  shalt  thou  be  brought  down  w  ith  the  trees  of  Eden 
unto  the  nether  parts  of  the  earth  :  thou  shalt  lie  in  the 
midst  of  the  uncircumcised,  w'ith  them  that  be  slain  by 
the  sword.  This  is  Pharaoh  and  all  his  multitude,  saith 
the  Lord  God."  Here  the  associates  of  Pharaoh,  under 
the  figure,  of  lofty  trees,  are  dehvered  '  to  death,'  go 
down  with  him  ^  i?ito  sheoly  '  into  the  pit,'  and  '  into  the 
lower  parts  of  the  earth.'  These  expressions  then  all 
mean  the  grave,  and  a  state  of  death.  Now  none  of 
these  phrases  include  the  idea  of  '  torment^'  for  the  as- 
sociates of  Pharaoh  are  positively  *  comforted^  there  !! 
(See  16  V.)  "  For  the  dead  know  not  anything,"  and  aU 
oppressions  and  sorrows  cease,  and  "  There  the  weary 
are  at  rest."  In  the  15  Yy  sheol  is  rendered  grave,  and 
perhaps  kever^  the  grave,  may  be  the  true  reading ;  but 
this  only  makes  the  argument  the  stronger.  For  then, 
sheol,  hell,  the  grave,,  death,  the  pit^  and  the  nether  or 
lower  parts,  aM  equally  express  the  state  of  death,  the 
privation  of  life,  and  consciousness.  Mark  th^se  multi- 
tudes are  all  in  sheol,  all  in  hell,  all  in  the  pit,  all  in  the 
grave,  and  all  in  the  nether  parts  of  the  earth  ;  but  they 
are  all  in  only  one  place- ;  therefore  all  the  terms  imply 
the  same  thing,  viz.,  a  state  of  death.     In  the  succeeding 


EXAMINATION  OF  SHEOL  AND  HABES.        195 

chapter  this  is  made  still  stronger  b}^  being  contrasted 
with  the  land  of  the  living  no  less  than  six  times.  To 
affirm  that  these  multitudes  are  conscious,  is  pointedly  to 
contradict  the  Spirit  of  God  !! 

In  Ezek.  32 :  21,  27,  sheol  occurs  twice.  The  dead  by 
a  bold  figure  of  speech,  are  represented  as  speaking  to 
the  king  of  Egypt,  who  was  to  be  slain  by  the  sword, 
"  out  of  the  midst  of  sheol.''''  "Of  course,"  says  Profes- 
sor Stuart,  ^^gravej  or  the  region  of  the  dead,  must  be 
the  meaning  here."  But  we  say,  this  being  only  a  figure, 
like  unto  the  rich  nian  speaking  to  Lazarus  while  in 
hades,  sheol  means  here,  the  state  of  death,  as  in  other 
places.  In  the  27  v,  the  multitudes  of  Meshech,  have 
"  gone  to  sheol  with  weapons  of  war  ;  and  they  have  laid 
their  swords  under  their  heads?'^  Here  is  such  a  plain 
allusion  to  the  common  custom  of  burying  warriors  along 
with  their  weapons ;  that  we  are  compelled  to  believe 
that  those  who  had  gone  to  sheol,  had  gone  to  the  grave, 
or  a  state  of  death,  and  are  contrasted  with  the  same 
sort  of  persons  who,  (23  v,)  "  caused  terror  in  the  land 
of  the  hving."  They  could  not  carry  their  weapons  to 
the  theological  hell  of  torments  ;  neither  are  they  in  "  the 
land  of  the  living,"  as  some  would  have  us  vainly  be- 
lieve. There  could  be  no  comfort  nor  shouting  in  their 
hell ! !  From  the  1 7  v,  the  word  hour  occurs  six  times, 
and  is  properly  translated  loit.  Kever  and  kcvoreem^ 
grave  and  graves,  occur  six  times ;  the  multitudes  are 
there,  and  they  are  in  the  sides  of  the  pit,  they  are  in 
sheol,  and  they  are  in  the  nether  parts  of  the  earth,  and 
they  are  not  in  "  the  land  of  the  hving,"  a  phrase  which 
occurs  no  less  than  six  times.  The  whole  is  very  plain 
and  terribly  emphatic  ;  and  we  call  the  reader's  attention 
to  the  whole  passage,  contained  in  Ezek.  32  :  17,  to  the 
end. 

In  Isa.  14  c,  The  wicked  Jews,  under  the  figure  of  an 
unchaste  female,  are  told,  9  v,  "  Thou  wentest  to  the 
king  with  ointment,  and  didst  increase  thy  perfumes,  and 
didst  send  thy  messengers  far  oiF,  and  didst  debase  thy- 
self even  unto  sheoiy  This  may  mean,  Thou  didst  pros- 
trate thyself  very  low,  or.  Thou  didst  make  thyself 
loathsome  as  death.  1  Sam.  2:6,"  The  Lord  killeth  and 
maketh  aUve ;  he  bringeth  down  to  sheol,  and  bringeth 
up."    To  bring  down  to  sheol  is  to  kill ;  to  bring  up 


196  BIBLE    VS.  TRADITION. 

from  sheol^  is  to  restore  to  life.  So  the  parallelism,  and 
contrast  compels  us  to  understand  it.  It  is  an  hyperbole. 
Thou  almost  killest,  and  then  restorest  again  to  health; 
seems  to  be  the  idea  conveyed.  2  Sam.  22 :  5,  ''  When 
the  waves  of  death  compassed  me,  the  floods  of  ungodly 
men  made  me  afraid  ;  the  sorrows  of  sheol  compassed 
me  about ;  the  snares  of  death  went  before  me ;  in  my 
distress  I  called  upon  the  Lord.. ..and  he  heard  my  voice." 
Here  again,  when  David  was  deUvered  from  death,  he 
was  delivered  from  hell,  {sheol).  This  is  repeated,  Ps. 
18:5.  We  copy  from  Fry's  translation  a  part  of  the  7th 
c.  of  Job ;  italicising  to  arrest  attention. 

7,  "  Remember  that  my  life  is  a  breath  of  air, 
It  cannot  return  to  see  good. 

8,  The  eye  that  saw  me  cannot  more  behold  me ; 
Thine  eyes  are  on  me,  and  I  am  not. 

9,  Consumed  is  the  cloud  that  hath  passed ; 
So  descending  to  sheol  he  rises  not  again : 

10,  He  returneth  not  again  to  his  house, 
His  place  shall  know  him  no  more. 

15,  Ay,  thou  dost  try  to  sutibcation  my  breath. 
My  bones  to  dissolution. 

16,  /  am  wasting — /  cannot  lice  for  ever  ! 
Desist  from  me,  for  my  days  are  a  vapor, 

17  What  is  a  poor  mortal^  that  thou  shouldst  make  him  of 
consideration. 

And  that  thou  shouldst  fix  thy  attention  on  him. 
21,  Since  now  /am  about  to  lie  down  in  the  dust^ 

And  thou  wilt  seek  me,  but  I  am  no  more  J 

As  the  cloud  is  entirely  dispersed  and  does  not  exist 
as  a  cloud  ;  so  is  he  that  descends  to  sheol ;  so  he  that 
descends  to  sheol  does  not  exist  as  a  man  or  a  Hving  be- 
ing of  any  kind  ;  for  if  there  were  any  essential  living 
part  left,  the  dissolved  cloud  would  not  be  a  fitting 
simile.  And  this  is  Job's  express  declaration,  that  the 
man  Job,  the  essential  '*  /"  should  not  exist;  and  even 
God  could  not  find  him,  as  a  living  being,  if  he  should 
seek  for  him. 

Job  14: 

13,  **  Oh  !  that  thou  wouldest  hide  me  in  sJieol  I 

That  thou  wouldst  conceal  me  till  thy  wrath  be  passed." 


EXAMINATION    OF    SHEOL    AND   HADES.  197 

Sheol  is  here  represented  as  a  hidden  or  concealed 
place,  where  Job  might  be  concealed  even  from  God  till 
his  wrath  be  passed  and  Job  raised  to  Hfe  again.  Sheol 
corresponds  here  to  the  Saxon  helle  or  hell^  and  to  the 
Greek  hades. 

Job  17: 

13,  •'  When  T  would  hope,  sheol  is  my  home ; 
In  darkness  I  spread  my  bed. 

14,  I  say  to  corruption,  Thou  art  my  father ! 
My  mother  !  and  my  sister !  to  the  worm. 

15,  Ah  !  where  is  that  which  I  long  for  ? 

Ay,  that  which  I  long  for — who  can  see  it? 

16,  Into  the  depth  o(  sheol  will  my  hope  descend, 
When  we  are  together,  below  in  the  dust." 

This  passage  is  very  exphcit ;  in  going  to  sheol,  hell, 
the  state  of  death,  he  would  be  with  darkness,  corruption, 
and  worms  ;  yet  he  ardently  longed  for  it  and  earnestly 
sought  it,  surely  not  as  a  place  of  conscious  torment,  but 
as  a  refuge  from  torment,  a  resting  in  unconsciousness 
till  the  wrath  of  God  be  passed,  and  he  be  raised  again 
in  a  nature  not  susceptible  of  pain. 

Job  24: 
19,  *'  As  drought  and  heat  consume  the  snow  waters  ; 
So  do  the  wicked  glide  into  sheol;.... 
And  the  worm  shall  feed  sweetly  upon  them." 

The  Septuagint  reads  this  differently  :  viz.,  "  Eetribu- 
tion  shall  be  made  to  the  sinner  for  what  he  hath  done." 
If  the  first  version  be  correct,  then  is  the  sinner  destroy- 
ed by  going  down  into  sheol ;  that  is,  he  no  more  exists 
than  snow  waters  exist  when  dried  up  by  heat.  Vapor 
they  may  be,  but  they  are  not  snow  waters  ;  so  the  sin- 
ner may  be  dust,  but  the  sinner  does  not  exist. 

Job  26  :  6,  "  Sheol  is  naked  before  him,  and  destruction 
hath  no  covering."  Here  again  sheol  and  destruction 
are  made  synonomous.  Ps.  55  :  15,  '*  Let  death  seize 
upon  them,  and  let  them  go  down  quickly  into  sheol.^^ 
The  same  meaning  and  parallel  as  the  last.  Ps.  86  :  13, 
"  Thou  hast  delivered  my  (nephesh)  soul  from  the  lowest 
sheol.^^  His  enemies  had  sought  his  soul,  that  is,  him- 
self, to  destroy  his  being ;  but  God  had  dehvered  hira 


198  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

from  the  most  terrible  and  cruel  death  ;  this  is  probably 
what  is  meant  by  the  lowest  skeol.  Ps.  88  :  3,  "For  my 
soul  is  full  of  trouble  :  and  my  life  draweth  nigh  unto 
sheol,  I  am  counted  with  them  that  go  down  into  the 
pit."  David  fully  expected  to  go  to  sheol  at  death,  but 
in  V.  5,  he  declares  he  would  be  "  Free  among  the  dead 
[from  all  his  troubles;]  like  those  that  are  pierced  through 
that  lie  in  the  [kever^)  grave,  whom  God  remembers  no 
more^  they  are  cut  off  from  his  hand."  In  the  14  v,  he 
says,  "  Lord,  why  casteth  thou  off  my  soul  ?  16  v,  Thy 
fierce  wrath  goeth  over  me ;  thy  terrors  have  (tsomath) 
annihilated  me:"  i.  c,  will  do  it. 

Ps.  141:7,"  Our  bones  are  scattered  at  the  mouth  of 
sheoiy  Here  the  grave  is  called  the  mouth  or  entrance 
to  the  state  of  death.  Pro  v.  1  :  10,  "  My  son,  if  sinners 
entice  thee,  consent  thou  not.  If  they  say,  Come  w^ith 
us,  let  us  lay  wait  for  blood ;  let  us  lurk  privily  for  the 
innocent  without  cause.  12  v.  Let  us  sw^allow  them  up 
alive  as  sheol ;  and  whole,  as  those  that  go  down  into  thje 
{hour)  pit."  This  does  not  well  accord  with  the  current 
theology,  which  teaches,  that  the  soul  or  spirit — some- 
times they  say  one,  and  sometimes  the  other,  for  error 
is  not  apt  to  be  very  definite — ^is  separated  from  the  man, 
or  at  least  from  his  body ;  but  these  sinners  would  swal- 
low them  WHOLE,  as  sheol  does^  and  deposit  them  in  a 
pit,  or  hole,  or  grave.  The  same  theology  teaches  too 
that  the  innocent  do  not  go  to  hell,  as  is  here  specified  ; 
but  to  heaven  at  death. 

Prov.  7  :  6,  *'  I  beheld  among  the  simple  ones... .a  young 
man  void  of  understanding.. ..And  behold,  there  met  him 
a  woman  with  the  attire  of  a  harlot,  and  subtile  of  heart. 
22  V,  He  goeth  after  her  straitway,  as  an  ox  goeth  to  the 
slaughter^  or  as  a  fool  to  the  correction  of  the  stocks  ; 
till  a  dart  strike  through  his  liver ;  as  a  bird  that  hasteth 
to  the  snare,  and  knoweth  not  that  it  is  for  his  /i/(2....She 
hath  cast  down  many  w^ounded  :  yea,  many  strong  men 
have  been  slain  by  her.  27  v,  Her  house  is  the  way  to 
sheol^  going  down  to  the  chambers  of  deaths  Here 
again,  the  cliimbers  of  death  and  hell  mean  the  same. 
Prov.  15:11,  ^^ Sheol  and  destruction  are  before  the  Lord." 
Destruction  and  hell  are  equal.  24  v,  "  The  way  of  life 
is  above  to  the  wise,  that  he  may  depart  from  sheol  be- 
neath."    Bheol,  hell,  and  death,  are  contrasted  with  life, 


'-  '  «HEOL    NOT   A    PLACE    OF   TORMENT.  199 

Mi6.   cottsciousftess.     Songs  8  :  6.,  "  Love  is  strong  as 
death  ;  jealoiisy  is  cruel  as  sAco^,"  death. 

We  shall  quote  four  passages  where  sheol  is  used  with- 
out any  apparent  r-eference  to  death.  DeuL  32 :  22, 
**  For  a  fire  is  kindled  in  mine  anger,  and  it  shall  burn 
wnto  the  lowest  sheol,  and  shaR  consume  the  earth  with 
fcer  inci^ase,  and  set  on  fire  the  fiDundations  of  the  moun- 
tains.''  The  French  translalioii  reads^  "  Evea  to  the  bot- 
tonn  of  the  lowest  places." 

Job  11: 

7,  "  Canst  thou  in  searcliing  discover  God  7 

Canst  thou  find  even  the  perfections  of  the  Almighty? 
*8,  Lo !  the  heights  of  the  heavens,  what  canst  thou  achieve  ? 

It  is  deeper  than  sheol !  what  canst  thou  discern  ? 
^,  Longer  th&n  the  earth  is  its  measure, 

And  wjder  tiian  tbe^eaf* 

Ps.  139:  7,  "  Wiiither  shall  I  go  from  tliy  {ruah) 
epirit?  or  whither  shaU  I  fiee  from  thy  presence  ?  If  I 
ascend  into  heaven,  thou  art  there  :  if  I  make  my  bed  in 
sheol.,  behdd,  tboa  art  there."  Tiiis  ppobably  refers  to 
the  all-pervading  intelligence  of  God;  though  some 
would  appl}?^  it  to  vthe  all-pervading  principle  of  the  spirit 
or  principle  of  life.  Amos  9:2,"  Though  they  dig  into 
sheol^  thence  shall  my  hand  take  them ;  though  they 
climb  up  to  heavaa,  thence  will  I  bring  them  down."  A 
strong  figure,  intimating  the  impossibility  of  evadiag  the 
justice  of  God.  Sheol  may  mean  here  an  ^ibyss,  a  deep 
grave,  or  even  a  state  of  death  as  in  other  places.  But 
mark,  God  ndinxtQi further  infiict  pain  upon  them  whils 
in  a  state  of  death ;  to  do  that  his  "  hand  must  take 
them"  from  thence,  must  restore  them  to  fife  again,  for 
4ead  men  cannot  feci 

Does  ti>e  impatient  reader  begin  to  ask  for  those  pas- 
sages where  skeol  really  designates  a  place  of  torment  for 
the  damned  souls  or  spirits  of  the  wicked  ?  We  cannot 
{find  any,  gentle  reader,  in  the  Bible,  and  we  refer  you  to 
^^ectarian  creeds  ;  but  we  will  give  you  Professor  Stuart's 
<ionfession  taken  from  pag^  114  of  his  "  Exegetical  Es- 
says." "  The. sum  of,  the  evidence  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  regard  to  sheol^  is,  that  the  Hebrews  did  probably 
in  some  cases.,  connect  ivith  the  use  of  this  ivord,  the  idea 
<cf  misery  subsequent  to  the  death  of  the  body.     It  seems 


20Q  BTBLR  TS.   TRA'omorf, 

ta  me  tliat  we  can  safely  believe  thia ;  aad  to  aver  more 
than  this  wouM  be  somewhat  hazardous,  when  all  the 
examples  of  the  word  are  duly  considered.""  He  points 
out  five  passages,  that  he  thinks  may  possibly  designate* 
a  place  of  misery,  where  (we  suppose  he  means)  the 
wicked  are  in  conscious  sufferings  viz.  ^  Job  21  :  13  ;  Ps. 
9  :  17,  18 ;  Prov.  5:5;  9  :  18  ;.  23  :  14.  He  also  fancies= 
that  Mat.  10:  28,.  and  Luke  12:  5;.  teach  a  hell  of  con- 
scious torment  ^  I 

If  we  understand  the  ProfessoFyhis  argument  is  some- 
thing like  this.     The  word  sheol  occurs-  siixty-four  or 
sixty-six  times  ;  in  fifty- three  of  these  places,  it  certai?ili^ 
does  not  mean  a  hell  of  conscious  torment ;.  but  there  are 
fi.ve  places, — that  is,  one  oat  of  thirteeUy — that,  in  conse- 
qneBce  of  the  use  of  figurative  languageyby  a  little  ingenu- 
ity may  he  twisted  so  as  to  countenance  this  popular,  semi- 
pagan  theology,,  of  an  existing  hell  where  the  wicked 
continue  ahve  in  torment ! !.    That  is,  this  same  word^ 
^\iQU p^'operly  used^  always  implies  a  state  of  death,  but 
it  may  also,  by  a  little  twisting,,  be  made  to  designate  its 
very  opposite,  a  state  of  miserable  life,  and  when  applied 
to  the  righteous,  a  state  of  happy  €07isciousness  ///     But 
it  would  be  just  as  logical^  to  take  our  last  example^ 
Amos  9 :  2,  and  insist  that  the-  wicked  are  happy  in  hea- 
ven, beca;use  it  says  of  them,  "  though  they  climb  up  ta 
heaven'^  I     Hut  we  shall  rightly  estimate  the  value  of 
Professor  Stuart's  opinion,  in  a  case  involving  the  truth 
of  any  of  his  favorite  dogmas,  by  his  remarks  on  Isa.  38  : 
17,  "  Behold  for  peace  I  had  great  bitterr^ss:  l>ut  thou 
hast  in  love  to  my  soul  delivered  it  from  {shokhath)  de- 
struction :  for  thou  hast   cast  all  my  sin»  behind  thy 
back.    For  sJteol  cannot  praise  thee,  death  cannot  celebrate 
thee  :  they  that  go  down  into  the  {hour)  pit  eannot  hope 
for  thy  truths     The  living,,  the  livings  he  shall  praise 
thee,  as  I  do  this  day."     "  He  cannot  mean^''  (says  Pro- 
fessor Stuart,  page  90,  '-  Exegetieal  Essays^)  "•  that  after 
death  there  is  na  ability  to  praise  Gody  Tua  existence  of 
the pomers omd  capacities  of  the  soul?     I  think  not.     It 
seems  to  me  clearly,  that  this  is  not  his  design  ;  although 
not  a  few  of  the  later  critics  hai^e  affirmed  it  to  be  so^ 
Shall  we  represent  the  Hebrews,  and  a  Hebrew  monarch 
enlightened  as  Hezekiak  was,  as  being  more  ignorant  ia 
respect  to  futurity  than  the  Egyptians  ?     The  people  of 


SHEOL  NOT  A  PLACE  OF  TORMENT.         201 

God  who  lived  under  the  light  of  a  revelation^  more  ig- 
norant than  those  who  were  in  the  midst  of  Egyptian 
night !  Believe  this  who  will,  I  must  have  stronger 
evidence  of  its  correctness  than  I  have  yet  found,  in  order 
to  give  it  credit." 

The  Professor  regards  the  meaning  of  this,  and  the 
many  kindred  expressions,  as  implying  that  the  dead  can- 
not praise  God  among  the  living  on  the  earth.  Thus  he 
assumes  that  the  Egyptians,  and  Pagans,  and  his  infallible 
self,  are  correct  in  their  creeds^  touching  the  state  of  the 
dead  in  sheol ;  and  that  Hezekiah,  David,  Job,  Isaiah,  Paul 
and  Christ,  and  the  concurrent  testimony  of  the  whole 
Scriptures,  are  wrong  III  Truly  a  very  modest  assump- 
tion !  But  he  flatly  contradicts  the  Bible  !  Let  us  ex 
amine  the  Professor's  passages  ;  premising  that  he  has 
been  rather  unfortunate  in  the  selection  of  his  writers ; 
for  it  is  an  established  principle  of  sound  criticism,  ''That 
no  intelligent  and  honest  writer,  ever  contradicts  him- 
self" His  passages  are  selected  from  Job,  David,  and 
Solomon  ;  all  of  whom  clearly  and  plainly  affirm  that 
sheol  is  a  state  of  unconsciousness. 

Job  21 :  13,  Speaking  of  the  prosperity  and  pleasures 
of  the  wicked,  says, — "  They  spend  their  days  in 
wealth,  and  in  a  moment  go  down  to  sheol,'''*  We  do 
not  perceive  the  slightest  intimation  here,  that  they  live 
or  are  tormented  in  sheol.  Nay,  more,  the  17,  22,  26,  30, 
32,  and  33  v,  are  directly  opposed  to  this  construction. 

Job  21 : 

13,  *'  They  wear  away  their  days  in  pleasure, 
And  quickly  descend  into  sheoL 

17,  How  often  does  God  extinguish  the  lamp  of  the  wicked  ? 
And  bringeth  their  destruction  upon  them  ? 

And  distributeth  snares  in  his  wrath  ? 

18,  They  become  like  stubble  before  the  wind, 
Like  the  chaff  that  is  driven  away  by  the  storm. 

22,  What !  will  God  teach  discernment  to  a  nothing'^ 
Will  he  judge  the  worm-eaten  body  ? 

25,  Another  will  die  with  an  embittered  spirit, 
So  that  he  could  not  relish  his  food. 

26,  Alike  in  the  dust  they  lie  doum, 
Alike  the  worm  doth  caver  them. 

28,  For  you  will  say,  "  Where  is  the  house  of  the  noble? 
And  where  is  the  tent,  the  habitation  of  the  wicked  1 


202  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

29,  Surely  you  have  not  inquired  of  those  that  travel  on  the 

road; 
Nor  have  you  acquainted  yourselves  with  their  proofs. 

30,  That  the  wicked  will  be  (Jchosakh)  spared  to  a  day  of  de- 

struction ; 

To  a  day  of  vengeance  will  he  be  carried  along. 
32j  He  too,  will  be  borne  to  the  sepulchre,  (A-erer,) 

And  the  watch  will  be  set  over  the  tumulus ; 
33,  The  sods  of  the  valley  will  he  sweet  for  him,^^ 

The  wicked  often  descend  quickly  into  sheol ;  but 
mark  the  items  of  the  context :  God  extinguisheth  the 
[nair)  lamp,  the  spirit,  or  life  of  the  wicked.  Prov.  20 : 
27,  "  The  spirit  of  man  is  the  (nair)  candle  of  the  Lord." 
24  :  20,  "  The  {nair)  candle  of  the  wicked  shall  be  put 
out."  Job  18  :  6,  "  His  {nair)  candle  shall  be  put  out 
with  him."  Job  and  Solomon  thus  forcibly  portray  the 
extinction  of  all  consciousness.  The  22  v.  teaches  very 
expressively  the  unconsciousness  of  the  dead,  and  per- 
haps this  is  the  reason  of  the  varieties  of  translation. 
The  26  V.  declares  that  all  fare  alike  in  aheol^  being  the 
unconscious  food  of  worms.  30  v.  The  wicked  will  be 
destroyed^  and  the  33  v.  declares  that  so  far  from  sheol 
being  a  place  of  torment,  that  the  grave,  where  the  wicked 
are,  is  positively  sweety  as  a  rest  from  pain.  Eemember 
sheol  is  not  a  place^  but  a  state  of  death  ;  the  righteous 
and  the  wicked  are  in  it — in  death — and  in  their  graves. 
Please  to  refer  to  the  other  evidence  we  have  produced 
from  the  intelligent^  honesty  and  consistent  Job. 

Ps.  9  :  17,  13,  "  The  wicked  shall  be  turned  into  sheol^ 
and  all  the  nations  that  forget  God.  For  the  needy  shall 
not  always  be  forgotten :  the  expectation  of  the  poor 
shall  not  perish  for  ever."  We  confess  that  we  draw  a 
conclusion  the  very  opposite  from  that  of  Professor 
Stuart.  Though  the  hope  of  the  poor  may  perish  for  a 
time,  by  his  death,— ;-for  "  the  righteous  perish," — yet  as 
they  will  be  raised  again,  their  hope  will  not  perish  for 
ever  ;  but  the  antithesis  requires  us  to  understand,  that 
notwithstanding  the  wicked  may  be  raised,  or  not  raised, 
yet  they  will  ultimately  perish  for  ever ;  and  perishing 
for  ever  is  the  very  opposite  of  living  for  ever.  The  ex- 
pression, "  turned  into  sheol^'^  implies  no  more  than 
death,  extinction  of  being.  What  says  the  context? 
20  V,  "  Put  them  in  feir,  O  Lord :  that  the  nations  may 


■SHEOL   NOT   A   PLACE    OP   TOEMENT.  203 

know  themselves  to  be  but  (enoush)  mortals."  To  live 
in  continued  torment,  a  man  must  be  indestructible ; 
that  is,  be  insusceptible  of  torments,  which  is  a  con- 
tradiction. The  5  V,  declares, — *^  Thou  hast  destroy- 
ed the  wicked,  thou  hast  put  out  their  name  for  ever 
and  ever."  If  this  does  not  mean,  that  they  will  be 
blotted  out  of  existence — we  think  it  does — ^yet  the  in- 
te/ligent,  hofiesi  and  consistent  Psalmist,  clearly  teaches 
elsewhere  that  thi«  is  their  fate.  Will  the  reader  peruse 
carefully  the  37th  Psalm  ?  we  quote  a  few  verses.  9  v, 
"Evil  doers  shall  be  cut  off."  10  v,  "  For  yet  a  little  while, 
and  the  wicked  shall  not  be :  yea,  thou  shalt  diligently 
consider  his  place,  and  it  shall  not  be."  20  v,  "  But  the 
wicked  shall  perish,  and  the  enemies  of  the  Lord  shall  be 
as  the  fat  of  iambs :  they  shall  consume  ;  into  smoke  shall 
they  CONSUME  uway?^  Ps.  83  :  9,  "  Do  unto  [thine  ene- 
mies] as  unto  the  Midianites who  (sliomad)  were  anni- 
hilated at  Endor :  they  became  as  dung  for  the  earth." 

Prov.  5  :  3-5,  "  For  the  lips  of  a  strange  woman  drop 

as  a  honey-comb but  her  end  is  bitter  as  wormwood.... 

5  V,  Her  feet  go  down  to  death  ;  her  steps  take  hold  on 
sheoiy  We  see  no  indication  of  torments  in  sheol  here ; 
but  here  is  a  parallelism,  and  here  the  rule  that  is  appli- 
cable to  it  ^'  If  one  member  of  a  parallelism  be  clearly 
understood,  the  other  member  is  hkewise  understood,  as 
it  must  always  correspond  and  can  never  contradict  it" 
As  one  member  signifies  death,  privation  of  life,  uncon- 
eeiousness ;  so  must  the  other, 

Prov.  9  :  13-18,  "  A  foolish  woman  is  clamorous to 

call  passengers.... Whoso  is  simple,  let  him  turn  in  hither 
..,.18  V,  But  he  knoweth  not  that  the  dead  are  there  ;  and 
that  her  guests  are  in  the  depths  of  sheol. ^^  If  her  guests 
are  dead  in  sheol,  we  cannot  see  how  any  that  are  not 
hopelessly  embued  with  the  popular  error  of  the  immor- 
tality, and  consequent  separate  existence  of  the  soul,  can 
possibly  suppose  that  the  dead  are  Hving  in  sheol.  This 
would  be  putting  bitter  for  sweet,  and  darkness  for  light, 
with  a  vengeance.  But  the  language  is  figurative. — 
"  Death  and  hell  [hades — sheol]  delivered  up  the  dead 
(not  the  living)  which  were  in  them."     Rev.  20  :   13. 

Prov.  23  :  14,  "Thou  shalt  beat  him  (thy  child)  with  a 
rod,  and  shalt  deUver  his  soul  from  sheol?'*  The  mean- 
ing of  this  is  obvious  to  all  but  a  Professor,  and  a  popu- 


204  BIBLE   VS.  TRADITION, 

lar  theologian.  As  ^  his  soul '  is  only  a  Hebraism  for 
himself,  it  simply  means,  That  timely  correction  will  save 
the  child  from  everlasting  death,  from  everlasting  des- 
truction.  The  going  of  the  righteous  to  sheoly  does  not 
preclude  their  resurrection  to  life  with  an  incorruptible 
nature.  Passages  in  N,  T.  will  be  examined  in  their 
places. 

THE  INMATES  OF  SHEOL  ARE  TNCONSCIOUS. 

We  have  a  few  more  passages  where  the  word  sheol 
occurs  that  clearly  define  its  nature,  and  need  but  little 
comment.  Ps.  6  :  4-6,  DavM  prays  to  be  deHvered  from 
death.  4  v^  *'  Eeturn,  O  Lord,  dehver  my  soul :  oh  save 
me  for  thy  mercies'  sake.  For  in  death  thei'e  is  no  re- 
memh'ance  of  thee  :  in  sheol  ^  wJw  shall  give  thee  tJianks  ?'''* 
Ps.  30  :  2,  3,  9,  "O  Lord  my  God,  I  cried  unto  thee,  and 
thou  hast  healed  me.  0  Lord,  thou  hast  brought  up  my 
soulfrofu  sheol :  thou  hast  kept  me  alive,,  that  I  should 
not  go  down  to  the  (boiir)  pit.  What  profit  is  there  in 
my  blood,  when  I  go  down  to  (sho/chath)  destruction  ? 
Shall  the  dust  pi'aise  thee  i  Shall  it  declare  thy  truth  .^'' 
Ps.  31  :  17,  "^Let  the  wicked  be  ashamed,  and  let  them 
be  silent  in  sheol^  Sheol  is  alike  the  state  of  the  right- 
eous and  the  wicked.  It  is  a  state  in  w^hich  there  is 
silence,  but  no  praise,^  no  remembrance,  no  thanks,  but 
the  very  soul  is  destroyed  for  a  time.  The  same  thing 
is  emphatically  taught  in  the  88th  Psalm,  though  the 
word  sheol  does  not  occur  there.  See  verses  3,  4,  5,  6» 
10,  11,  12  and  16;  and  Psa.  115:  17.  Ps.  49:  14,  15^ 
"  Like  sheep  they  are  laid  in  sheol ;  death  shall  feed  on 
them  ;  and  the  upright  shall  have  dominion  over  them  in 
the  morning  [of  the  resurrection]  ;  and  their  beauty  shall 
consume  in  sheol  from  their  dwelling.  But  God  will  re- 
deem my  soul  from  the  power  of  sheol :  for  he  shall  re- 
ceive me."  As  the  wicked  are  laid  in  sheol  like  sheep, 
they  must  be  as  unconscious  as  are  dead  sheep. 

Isa.  38  :  10,  ''  I  said  in  the  cutting  off  of  my  days,  I 
shall  go  to  the  gates  of  sheol  :  I  am  deprived  of  the  resi- 
due of  my  years.  I  said,  I  shall  not  see  the  Lord,  even 
the  Lord  in  the  land  of  the  living.  17  v,  Thou  hast  in 
love  to  my  soul  dehvered  it  from(shokhath)  destruction: 
for  thou  hast  cast  all  my  sins  behind  thy  back.     18  v, 


PSALM    16:    10    EXAMINED.  205 

For  sheol  cannot  praise  thee^  death  cannot  celebrate  thee  : 
they  that  go  down  to  the  {hour)  pit  cannot  hope  for  thy 
truth.  1'he  hving,  the  living,  he  shall  praise  thee,  as  I 
do  this  day."     Comment  cannot  make  this  stronger. 

Ecc.  9  :  5,  "  The  living  k7iow  that  they  shall  die  :  but 
the  dead  know  not  any  things  neither  have  they  (present 
tense,  at  this  time)  any  more  a  reward  ;  for  the  memory 
of  them  is  forgotten.  Also  their  love,  and.  their  hatred ^ 
and  their  envy^  is  noiv  perished ;  neither  have  they  any 
more  a  portion  {le-oulom)  during  this  age  in  any  thing 
that  is  done  under  {shejnesh)  the  light  of  the  sun.  10  v, 
Whatsoever  thy  hand  findeth  to  do,  do  it  with  thy  might  ; 
for  there  is  no  work^  nor  device^  nor  knowledge^  nor  ivis- 
dom,  in  sheol,  whither  thou  goest.^^  Reader,  examine 
these  passages  carefully,  and  judge  for  yourself.  Let  no 
person  say  he  believes  the  Bible,  after  he  has  read  these 
passages — and  we  have  quoted  all  the  passages  where 
sheol  occurs,  excepting  Ps.  16  :  10 — if  he  shall  still  insist 
that  there  is  knowledge,  torment,  or  consciousness  in 
sheol,  or  in  hell,  which  words  ahvays  express  a  state  of 
death  and  unconsciousness 

EXAMINATION    OF   PSALM    16  I    10. 

Ps.  16: 

10,  "  Thou  wilt  not  leave  my  sbul  in  hell,  (sheol)  ; 

Neither  wilt  thou  suffer  thy  Holy  One  to  see  corruption." 

We  have  reserved  this  important  passage  for  the  last, 
because  inspiration  teaches  us,  that  it  speaks  of  the  re- 
surrection of  Jesus  Christ,  which  is  the  foundation  stone 
of  the  gospel  system.  Take  away  this,  and  then  all  the 
righteous  souls  that  have  already  entered  sheol  have 
entirely  perished:  1  Cor.  15:  18.  As  all  future  exist- 
ence, for  the  dead,  is  made  to  depend  upon  a  resurrec- 
tion, and  as  a  resurrection  from  the  dead  always  and 
necessarily  implies  a  restoration  again  to  life,  it  follows 
most  conclusively  that  the  dead  in  sheol  are  altogether 
deprived  of  every  vestige  of  life,  of  consciousness,  of  be- 
ing,  excepting  in  the  purpose  of  God  as  to  the  future. — 
For  it  would  be  a  manifest  contradiction,  to  promise  a 
restoration  to  Hfe,  to  those  that  are  not,  and  never  will 
be  deprived  of  life.     That  refuge  of  lies — ''  the  conscious 


206  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

existence  of  the  soul  when  separated  from  the  body" — 
will  not  avail  here,  for  the  soul  is  principally  spoken  of, 
and  interchangably  with  the  body,  or  the  person  himself, 
as  is  likewise  the  case  in  several  of  the  passages  from 
the  Psalms  and  Isaiah,  but  recently  quoted. 

In  referring  this  text  to  the  resurrection  of  Christ, 
Peter  tells  us,  (Acts  2  :  31,)  "  That  his  soul  was  not  left 
in"  sheol^  Greek  "  hades,  and  that  his  flesh  did  not  see 
corruption,  for  this  Jesus  hath  God  raised  up."  And 
that  David  meant  Christ  and  not  himself,  he  states  in  the 
29th  and  34th  v.  For  the  soul  of  David,  or  David  himself, 
is  still  "dead  and  buried,  and  his  sepulchre  is  with  us  to 
this  day,"  and  consequently  the  soul  of  David  did  see 
corruption ;  (Acts  13  :  36)  "  For  David  is  not  ascended 
into  the  heavens."  34  v.  That  the  soul  of  Christ  should 
die  was  made  a  matter  of  prophecy ;  and  that  it  did  die 
is  matter  of  sacred  history.  "  His  soul  was  made  an 
offering  for  sin;"  "  His  soul  was  poured  out  unto  death." 
*'  His  soul  was  exceedingly  sorrowful  even  unto  death;" 
"  He  gave  his  soul  {psuche)  a  ransom  for  many;"  and 
^WQ  times  he  declared  that  "  He  laid  down  his  soul 
{psuche)  for  the  sheep."  So  when  his  soul  died  it  went 
down  into  sheol,  "  into  the  lower  parts  of  the  earth,"  or 
grave  ;  but  God  did  not  leave  his  soul  in  sheol ^  but 
raised  it  on  the  third  day  before  it  saw  corruption.  But 
to  suppose  that  sheol  or  hades  mean  a  hell  where  the 
wicked — or  any  part  of  them — are  alive  in  torment,  or 
that  the  soul  of  Christ  was  alive  in  any  sense,  contradicts 
the  express  declaration  of  the  Spirit  by  Peter,  and  his 
definition  of  the  resurrection.  And  more,  it  contradicts 
the  theological  dogma,  '*  That  the  souls  of  all  the  right- 
eous go  to  heaven  at  death  ;"  for  David  did  not  go  there, 
and  the  soul  of  Christ  did  not  go  there.  Some  indeed 
absurdly  tell  us  that  the  soul  of  Christ  preached  the  gos- 
pel to  living  damned  souls  in  hell.  But  this  is  a  flagrant 
contradiction.  The  gospel  is  glad  tidings  of  great  joy, 
the  ofler  of  hfe  and  pardon  to  those  whose  life  is  forfeited 
by  transgression.  But  preachers  tell  us  that  the  damned 
are  immortal,  and  consequently  cannot  lose  their  lives ; 
that  they  must  suffer  endless  misery,  and  consequently 
cannot  be  pardoned  !  But  does  not  the  Spirit  say,  Ecc. 
9 :  10,  That  there  is  no  work  in  sheol,  no  wisdom,  nor 


EXAMINATION   OF   HADES.  207 

device,  nor  knowledge ;  how  then  could  the  good  work 
of  preaching  be  done  in  such  a  place  ? 

As  ''  my  soul,"  in  our  text,  is  only  an  Hebraism  for 
me^  and  as,  in  the  cUmate  of  Judea,  corruption  was  sup- 
posed to  take  place  on  the  fourth  day — see  John  11:  39, 
"  My  Lord,  by  this  time  he  is  putrid  ;  for  four  days  have 
elapsed" — the  not  being  suflfered  to  see  corruption,  was 
equal  to  the  promise  of  a  resurrection  by  the  third  day. 
And  the  text  and  context,  divested  of  their  oriental  and 
poetical  costume,  is  equivalent  to  a  promise  ;  and  inspired 
the  hope,  "  I  rejoice  in  the  anticipation  of  an  early  re- 
surrection, for  thou  wilt  show  me  the  path  of  Hfe."  For 
it  is  clear  that  all  the  terms,  *  my  heart,'  *  my  tongue  or 
glory,'  '  my  flesh,'  *  my  soul,'  ^  thy  Holy  One,'  all  consti- 
tute but  one,  indivisible,  personal  being.  This  one  indi- 
vidual being,  constituting  the  Messiah,  died,  entered  into 
sheol,  or  the  state  of  death  ;  but  his  Father  quickly 
raised  him  to  life  again  ;  and  therefore  he  can  say,  "  I  am 
he  that  liveth,  and  was  dead ;  and,  behold,  I  am  alive 
for  evermore.  Amen  ;  and  have  the  keys  of  hades  and  of 
death;"  Rev.  1 :  18.  "  And  because  I  live  ye  (my  ser- 
vants) shall  live  also:"  John  14:  19.  Therefore  the 
future  hfe  of  the  Christian  "  is  hid  with  Christ  in  God. 
And  when  Christ,  who  is  our  life,  shall  appear,  then 
shall  we  also  appear  with  him  in  glory." 

EXAMINATION   OF   HADES. 

As  Peter  in  Acts  2 :  27,  in  translating  Ps.  16 :  10, 
uses  the  Greek  term  hades^  as  a  representative  of  the 
Hebrew  sheol ;  and  as  the  Septuagint  translates  sheol  by 
hades,  60  times  out  of  63,  we  have  authority  for  suppos- 
ing that  hades  has  the  same  general  meaning  as  sheol, 
viz.  death  ;  a  state  of  death  ;  the  dominion  of  death  ;  and 
the  grave,  as  a  general  receptacle  of  the  dead.  The 
word  hades  is  derived  from  a,  not,  and  idein,  to  see ;  the 
unseen,  the  invisible,  obscure,  dark;  and  agrees  nearly 
with  the  Saxon  word,  hell,  as  being  invisible  and  hidden. 
The  ancients  often  used  the  hades  for  a  state  of  death. — 
"  Hades  pontias^^ — death  by  sea ;  "  hades  phonios^^ — 
death  by  murder. 

Hades  occurs  in  the  N.  T.  eleven  times,  viz.  Mat.  1 1  : 
23;   16:  18;  Luke  10:  15:  16:  23:   Acts  2:  27,  31; 


208  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

1  Cor.  15:  55;  Eev.  1  :  18;  6 :  8  ;  20 :  13,  14.  Hades 
is  translated  grave^  in  1  Cor.  15  :  55;  but  in  every  other 
place,  Jiell. 

"  As  to  the  word  liades^''  says  Dr.  Campbell  on  the 
Gospels,  Diss.  6,  *'  in  my  judgment  it  ought  never  to  he 
reiidered  hell  ;  at  least  in  the  sense  wherein  that  word 
is  now  universally  understood  by  Christians.  In  the  Old 
Testament,  the  corresponding  w^ord  is  sheol^  w'hich  signi- 
fies the  state  of  the  dead  in  general,  without  regard  to 
the  goodness  or  badness  of  the  persons,  their  happiness 
or  misery.. ..The  state  of  the  dead  is  always  represented 
under  those  figures  which  suggest  something  dreadful, 
dark,  and  silent,  about  w^hich  the  most  prying  eye,  and 
listening  ear,  can  acquire  no  information.  The  term 
hades  is  well  adapted  to  express  the  idea.  To  this^  the 
word  HELL,  in  its  primitive  signification^  perfectly  corres- 
ponded. For  at  first  it  denoted  only  what  was  secret 
OR  concealed." 

Dr.  Clarke  says.  Mat.  11:  23,  of  hades  :  "  The  word 
hell^  used  in  the  common  translation,  conveys  now  an  im- 
proper meaning  of  the  original  word ;  because  helli^  only 
used  to  signify  the  place  of  the  damned.  But  the  w^ord 
hell  comes  from  the  Anglo-Saxon,  helan^  to  cover."  But 
yet  absurdly  enough,  he  says,  Acts  2 :  27,  "  This  hades 
was  Tatarus  to  the  wicked,  and  Elysium  to  the  good." 
Thus  acknowledging  and  endorsing  the  Pagan  fable  !!! 

Mat.  11  :  23,  is  parallel  to  Luke  10  :  15.  "Thou,  Ca- 
pernium,  which  art  exalted  to  heaven,  shalt  be  brought 
down  to  hades  .*"  Luke,  "  be  thrust  dow^n  to  hades^ — 
Hades  seems  to  mean  here  humihation,  as  contrasted 
with  present  exaltation ;  as  death  is  opposed  to  life.  The 
city  w^as  destroyed  by  the  Komans  soon  after.  The  high 
privileges  which  it  enjoyed  and  lightly  esteemed,  brought 
destruction  upon  it  and  its  inhabitants.  But  as  about 
forty  years  elapsed  from  the  prophecy  to  the  fulfillment, 
many  who  then  inhabited  it  escaped  the  general  ruin. 
The  expression  may  hkewise  refer  to  the  everlasting  de- 
struction, and  death  of  those  that  rejected  the  teachings 
of  Christ ;  but  as  the  reference  is  to  a  day  of  judgment 
it  seems  rather  to  refer  to  the  general  ruin  that  came  up- 
on the  city  and  its  inhabitants.  At  all  events,  here  is  no 
allusion  to  torments  after  death. 

Acts  2  :  27,  is  but  the  Greek  translation  of  Ps.  16  :  10, 


EXAMINATION   OF   HADES.  209 

and  we  refer  to  our  examination  of  that  text  for  an  ex- 
position of  this.  The  Hebrew  word  nephesh  is  here  re- 
presented by  psuclie^  and  sheol  by  hades.  Parkhurst  ac- 
knowledges that  psuche  in  this  place  means  the  body  or 
animal  frame,  31  \\  '^  He,  seeing  this  before,  spake  of 
the  resurrection  of  Christ,  that  his  soiol  was  not  left  in 
hades ^  neither  his  flesh  did  see  corruption.''  Kitto  con- 
fesses the  same  thing.  From  the  Syriac,  Dr.  Murdock 
translates,  "  And  he  foresaw  and  spoke  of  the  resurrec- 
tion of  Messiah,  that  he  was  not  left  in  the  grave,  neither 
did  his  body  see  corruption."  '  His  somP  in  Greek,  is  he 
in  the  Syriac. 

Mat.  16:  18,  Campbell's  translation.  Christ  speaking 
to  Peter  said,  "  I  tell  thee  likewise.  Thou  art  named 
Rock  ;  and  on  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church,  over 
which  the  gates  of  Iiades  shall  not  prevail."  ^  The  gates 
ofhadeSj^  may  mean  the  power  and  dominion  of  hades ^  as 
the  gates  of  cities  were  places  where  pei*sons  collected 
for  judicature.  Gen  22:  17,  "Thy  seed  shall  possess 
the  gate  of  his  enemies."  Christ  shall  possess  the  power 
and  place  of  entrance  into  the  cities  and  kingdoms  of  his 
enemies.  As  hades  means  death,  or  the  state  of  death, 
so,  *  the  gates  of  hades,  means  the  power  or  dominion  of 
death.  Death  may  prevail  over  the  members  of  the 
church  of  Christ,  for  a  little  season,  but  "  when  Christ, 
who  is  the  Resurrection  and  the  Life,  shall  appear,  then 
will  he  raise  all  his  true  disciples  to  life,  with  an  incor- 
ruptible nature,  that  will  no  more  be  subject  to  death. 
The  most  of  the  saints  are  now  under  the  dominion  of 
death ;  death  has  obtained  a  temporary  victory  over 
them  ;  they  sleep  in  a  state  of  unconsciousness  ;  but  they 
will  be  awakened  by  the  voice  of  the  {archaggelon)  ruler 
of  angels,  and  with  the  trumpet  of  God  :  and  the  dead 
in  Christ  shall  rise  first. ..to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air ; 
and  so  shall  we  ever  be  with  the  Lord."  1  Thess.  4:16; 
Col.  3  :  4.  Peter  was  entrusted  with  the  keys  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  ;  he  opened  the  way  to  both  Jews  and 
Gentiles,  by  first  proclaiming  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  through  a  crucified,  but  now 
risen  Savior.  Acts  2 :  44;  10:  34;  15:7.  And  the 
church  was  built  upon  the  foundation  of  the  apostles,  and 
prophets,  (generally,  and  upon  Peter  particularly,)  Jesus 
Christ  himself  being  the  chief  corner  stone.    Ep.  2  :  20. 


210  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

But  ^  the  gates  o^hades^  says  Parkburst,  ^  may  be  al- 
lusive to  the  form  of  the  Jewish  sepulchres,  which  were 
large  caves  with  a  narrow  mouth  or  entrance,  many  of 
which  are  to  be  found  in  Judea.'  The  Septuagint  trans- 
lates Isa.  38  :  10,  ^  Gates  of  sheol^  by  ^  gates  of  Jmdes? 
But  we  consider  it  a  settled  point  of  Bibhcal  criticism 
that  sheol  and  hades  never  mean  the  grave  excepting  in 
a  general  sense,  as  expressive  of  death.  We  consider 
the  expression  nearly  allied  to  that  in  Ps.  107  :  18,  "  They 
draw  near  unto  the  gates  of  death."  But  whether  death, 
or  the  grave — as  implying  death — be  meant,  the  sense  is 
not  much  altered  ;  for  as  He  "  brought  again  from  the 
dead  our  Lord  Jesus,  that  great  Shepherd  of  the  sheep,'' 
"  so  also  those  that  sleep  in  Jesus  will  God  bring  with 
him" ;  from  the  dead  ;  and  either  way  the  church  will 
ultimately  triumph  over  death — "  hades  will  not  prevail 
against  it." 

Eev.  1  :  18,  "  I  am  he  that  liveth,  and  was  dead  ;  and 
behold  I  am  alive  for  evermore,  Amen  ;  and  have  the 
keys  oi  hades  and  of  death." 

Will  the  reader  refer  to  our  exposition  of  Ps.  16  :  10, 
Acts  2  :  27,  3 1  ;  and  to  the  whole  of  the  article  on  "  The 
Prison."  In  John  11  :  25,  Jesus  calls  himself"  The  Re- 
surrection and  the  Life,"  and  Petercharges  upon  the  Jews 
Acts  3:15,  that  they  "  killed  the  Author  of  Life,  whom 
God  hath  raised  from  the  dead."  That  is,  Christ  will 
be  the  Author  of  the  life  of  all  those  who  will  ultimately 
live  for  ever ;  for  Christ  is  the  first  who  has  been  "  born 
again"  from  the  dead  with  an  incorruptible  nature.  Heb. 
2:9,"  Jesus  was  made  a  httle  lower  than  the  angels  for 
the  suffering  of  death,....that  he  by  the  grace  of  God 
should  taste  death  for  every  man,....  14  v,  that  through 
death  he  might  destroy  him  that  had  the  power  of  death, 
that  is,  the  devil ;  and  deliver  them,  who  through  fear  of 
death  were  all  their  life  time  subject  to  bondage."  Heb. 
9:15,  Macknight — "  And  for  this  reason,  he  is  the  Me- 
diator of  the  new  covenant,  that  his  death  being  accom- 
plished for  the  redemption  of  the  transgressions  of  the 
first  covenant,  the  called  may  receive  the  promise  of  the 
eternal  inheritance."  16  v,  "  For  where  there  is  a  cove- 
nant, there  is  a  necessity  that  the  death  of  the  appointed 
sacrifice  be  brought  in."  Therefore  Christ  has  entered 
once  into  the  holy  places,   12  v,  "  By  his  own  blood, 


EXAMINATION   OF   HADES.  211 

having  obtained  for  us  an  eternal  redemption"  from  death 
and  the  grave,  and  the  authority  "  to  open  the  prison 
doors  to  those  who  are  bound"  therein,  and  who  are  now 
under  the  dominion  of  hades  or  death  ;  but  "  when  Christ 
who  is  our  Life  shall  appear,"  then  will  he  use  "  the  keys 
of  hades  and  of  death''''  to  unlock  the  prison  house  and  hbe- 
rate  the  prisoners  therefrom. 

1  Cor.  15  :  54-57,  '^-Now,  when  this  corruptible  shall 
have  put  on  incorruption,  and  this  mortal  shall  have  put 
on  immortality,  then  shall  happen  the  thing  which  is 
written,  (Isa.  25:  8,)  *  Death  is  swallowed  up  for  ever.' 
Where,  O  death !  is  thy  sting  ?  Where,  O  hades  I  is 
thy  victory  ?  Now  thanks  be  to  God  who  giveth  us  the 
victory,  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  The  clauses 
of  the  b5  V,  may  have  read  differently  in  the  sixth  cen- 
tury. '*  Where,  O  death  !  is  thy  victory  ?  Where,  Q 
death  !  is  thy  sting  ?" 

Isa.  25:  6,  and  several  succeeding  chapters  is  a  pro 
phecy  of  the  coming  of  the  Lord  and  the  establishment 
of  his  kingdom  upon  the  earth  at  that  period.  Then  will 
"  death  be  swallowed  up  in  victory,"  or  *  for  ever.'  Death 
reigns  now,  exercising  his  dominion  over  the  saints,  as  he 
did  over  Christ  himself,  for  "  Christ  being  raised  from 
the  dead,  dieth  no  more ;  death  hath  no  more  dominion 
over  him."  Rom.  6  :  9,  So  death  has  obtained  a  partial 
victory  over  the  saints  and  church  of  God  ;  but  when 
Christ  comes,  and  raises  his  saints  to  life,  their  corrupti- 
ble and  mortal  natures  are  invested  with  incorruptibility 
and  immortality,  for  the  first  time.  Then  death,  which 
had  swallowed  them  up,  and  hades^  the  dominion  of 
death  shall  themselves  be  swallowed  up,  so  far  as  the 
saints  are  concerned,  for  ever  ;  preparatory  to  their  final 
destruction,  when  death,  and  hades ^  the  dominion  of 
death,  shall  no  more  exist.  Death  and  hades^  are  here 
personified,  and  invested  w^ith  a  poetical  living  existence 
to  show  their  power,  and  the  termination  of  it  over  the 
church  of  God.  In  the  55  v,  the  apostle  quotes  from 
Hosea  13:  14,  "I  will  ransom  them  from  the  power  of 
sheol^  ( Gr.  hades)  ;  I  will  redeem  them  from  death  :  O 
death,  I  will  be  thy  plagues ;  O  sheol  (hades) j  I  will  be 
thy  destruction  :  repentance  shall  be  hid  from  mine 
eyes."  The  Septuagint  in  this  place  reads  nearly  as  the 
apostle. 


212  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

This  passage  establishes  the  following  propositions  : — 

1.  That  until  the  saints  are  raised  from  the  dead,  they 
are  mortal  and  corruptible ;  and  so  the  dogma  of  natural 
immortality,  or-the  immortality  of  the  soul,  is  demonstra- 
ted to  be  a  fiction. 

2.  That  death  has  obtained  a  complete,  though  tem- 
porary victory  over  the  saints  of  God,  and  consequently 
no  principle  of  life  and  consciousness  belong  to  the  saints 
daring  the  dominion  of  death. 

3.  That  at  the  coming  of  Christ  the  saints  are  raised 
from  a  state  of  death,  of  unconsciousness,  and  are  then 
invested  with  incorruptibility,  an  undecaying  nature,  and 
consequently  with  immortality ;  principles  unpossessed 
prior  to  that  time. 

4.  That  as  this  victory  over  death  is  obtained  ''  through 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ^''  the  wicked,  who  are  not  in 
Christ,  must  ultimately  remain  under  the  dominion  of 
death  ;  they  not  being  incorruptible,  and  not  being  im- 
mortal, must  ultimately  "  perish  in  their  own  corrup- 
tion." 

5.  A  period  will  arrive  when  "  there  will  be  no  more 
death."  Death  and  the  dominion  of  death  over  all  the 
righteous  will  cease  to  exert  any  power. 

And  now  we  ask,  Why  have  our  translators  departed 
from  their  usual  practice  in  this  passage,  and  rendered 
hades  by  the  word  grave  instead  of  hell  ?  Did  they  per- 
ceive that  as  hades  or  hell^  is  to  be  destroyed,  that  it 
would  have  endangered  their  favorite  theory  of  eternal 
misery  ?  Or,  did  they  see  that  as  hades  has  dominion 
over  the  righteous  for  a  time,  and  that  they  were  re- 
deemed therefrom — brought  back,  by  Christ  himself  go- 
ing into  hades  that  he  might  abolish  its  power  over  the 
saints  for  ever — that  hence  hades  could  not  mean  a 
place  of  conscious  and  horrible  torments,  and  had  they 
rendered  hades  hell^  in  this  passage,  their  readers  would 
have  perceived  the  same  thing  ?  We  must  say  it  looks 
very  like  intentional  deception. 

Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  at  the  end  of  1  Cor.  15,  after  profes- 
sing an  '*  honest  intention  and  an  earnest  desire  to  find 
out  the  truth,"  makes  the  following  singular  admission. 
*'  One  remark  I  cannot  help  making  ;  the  doctrine  of  the 
resurrection  appears  to  have  been  thought  of  much  more 
consequence  among  the  primitive  Christians  than  it  is 


EXAMINATION    OT   HADES.  5^13 

now  !  How  is  this  ?  The  apostles  were  continually  in- 
sisting on  it,  and  exciting  the  followers  of  God  to  dili- 
gence, obedience,  and  cheerfulness  through  it.  And 
their  successors  in  the  present  day  seldom  mention  it  1 
So  apostles  preached,  and  so  primitive  Christians  be- 
lieved ;  and  so  we  preach,  and  so  our  hearers  believe. 
There  is  not  a  doctrine  in  the  Gospel  on  which  more 
stress  is  laid  ;  and  there  is  not  a  doctrine  in  the  present 
system  of  preaching  which  is  treated  with  more  neglect." 
Truly,  Doctor,  the  apostle  based  the  whole  of  future 
life  upon  this  one  doctrine,  ^^If  there  be  no  resurrection^ 
there  is  no  future  life  ;''^  which  proposition  he  distinctly 
states  five  times  in  this  same  chapter :  besides,  by  con- 
trasting the  present  constitution  of  man  with  that  nature 
he  must  possess  to  make  him  live  forever,  he  demon- 
strates the  absolute  necessity  of  a  resurrection,  else  the 
righteous  have  already  perished.  The  Doctor  was  bhnd- 
ed  by  his  creed ;  for  consistently  therewith,  there  cannot 
possibly  be  any  resurrection  of  the  dead,  as  his  never, 

*  never-dying  soul,'  has  never  been  subjected  to  the  do- 
minion of  death ;  nay,  is  more  ahve  without  the  body 
than  with  it,  and  goes  immediately  from  death  to  glory ; 
and  therefore,  what  is  the  use  and  importance  of  a  resur- 
rection ?  particularly  after  he  has  altered  the  apostle's 
*'  Eesurrection  of  the  Dead^''  into  the  "  Resurrection  of 
the  Body^''  merely!     But  was  the  Doctor  ^honest'  and 

*  earnest'  in  his  *  desire  to  find  out  the  truth  ?'  why  then 
appeal  from  the  oracles  of  God,  to  *  vain  philosophy  and 
the  traditions  of  men,'  and  direct  his  readers  to  ^''DreuPs 
Essays?''''  And  why  does  he  shamefully  pervert  the 
words  of  the  living  God,  in  his  exposition  of  verse  45  : 
"  And  so  it  is  written,  The  first  man  Adam  was  made  a 
living  soul;"  the  last  Adam  was  made  a  quickening 
spirit  ?"  The  Doctor  remarks,  "  The  apostle  says  this 
is  written :  The  first  man  Adam  was  made  a  living  soul  : 
this  is  found.  Gen.  2:  7,  in  the  words  nishmath  chaiyim, 
the  breath  of  lives  ;  which  the  apostle  translates  psuchen 
zosa72j  a  living  souiy  Now  the  Doctor  must  have 
known,  that  the  apostle  alluded  to  Gen.  2 :  7,  "  Vayehi 
ha- Adam  le-nephesh  chaiyh — The  Adam  was  for,  or  be- 
came, a  living  soul;"  for  he  quotes  these  words  in  the 
same  connection.  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  the 
apostle  asserts  that  the  last  clause  was  written,  though 


214  BIBLE   VS.  TRADITION. 

the  same  in  substance  appears  often.  Can  the  Doctor 
be  inexcusable  here  ?  We  say  not.  See  his  exposition  of 
this  very  passage,  and  the  distinction  he  makes  between 
the  nephesh  and  the  nesme  or  nishmath. 

Eev.  20 :  13-15,  "  And  the  sea  gave  up  the  dead  that 
were  in  it ;  and  death  and  hades  delivered  up  the  dead 
which  were  in  them  :  and  they  were  judged  every  man 
according  to  their  ^vorks.  And  death  and  hades  were 
cast  into  the  lake  of  fire.  This  is  the  second  death.  And 
whosoever  w'as  not  found  written  in  the  book  of  life  was 
cast  into  the  lake  of  fire." 

This  solemn  passage  describes  the  end  of  the  wicked 
and  the  end  of  Jiades  or  hell.  They  shall  be  entirely  de- 
stroyed. As  death  and  hades  here  are  personifications, 
so  we  conceive  the  lake  of  fire  sympolizes  the  entire  de- 
struction of  all  that  are  cast  into  it.  As  hell  itself  is  to 
be  destroyed,  it  cannot  at  the  same  time  be  a  place  where 
the  wicked  will  continue  to  be  tormented. 

Eev.  6:  8,  "And  I  looked,  and  behold  a  pale  horse: 
and  his  name  that  sat  on  him  w^as  Death,  and  Ha- 
des followed  with  him.  And  power  was  given  unto 
them  over  the  fourth  part  of  the  earth,  to  kill  with  the 
sword,  and  with  hunger,  and  with  death,  and  with  the 
beasts  of  the  earth."  This  is  a  prophecy  of  some  great 
destruction,  in  which  many,  by  various  agencies,  will  be 
swept  into  the  dominion  of  hades  or  death.  A  place  of 
perpetual  torment  is  by  no  means  recognized  in  this 
passage. 

Luke  16 :  22,  "The  rich  man  also  died  and  was  buried; 
and  in  hades^  being  in  torments,  he  looked  up,  and  saw 
Abraham  afar  off,  and  Lazarus  in  his  bosom." 

In  this  parable,  the  Jewish  priesthood,  personated  by 
the  rich  man,  died,  the  priesthood  being  abolished  ;  and 
while  in  hades^  the  dominion  of  death,  he  saw  the  pecu- 
liar privileges  of  the  Abrahamic  covenant  in  the  poss- 
ession of  the  formerly  despised  Lazarus,  w^ho  personated 
the  Gentiles.     Will  the  reader  please  mark  these  points  : 

1.  The  rich  man  died:  "The  dead  know  not  any- 
thing."    Ecc.  9:  5,  6;  Ps.  146:  4. 

2.  He  was  in  hades^  equal  to  sheol^  "  There  is  no  work, 
nor  device,  nor  knowledge^  nor  wisdom,  in  sheol^  whither 
thou  goest."  Ecc.  9:10.  If  the  rich  man  represented 
a  single  person,  and  that  person  dead  and  under  the  do- 


GEHEfrNA VALLEY    OF   HINNOM.  215 

minion  of  death,  he  could  not  possibly  be  alive  at  the 
same  time. 

3.  As  no  inferential  testimony  can  set  aside  positive 
and  direct  testimony,  this  must  be  received  as  a  figure^ 
such  as  is  of  frequent  occurrence,  respecting  this  same 
dominion  of  death.  In  Ezek.  32:  21,  the  dead  by  a 
strong  figure  of  speech,  are  represented  as  speaking  "out 
</f  the  midst  of  sheol^''''  much  in  the  same  manner  as  the 
rich  man  is  represented  as  speaking  here.  Pharaoh  is 
said  to  be  comforted  in  sheol^  when  he  sees  his  enemies 
like  himself  in  one  common  destruction.  But  we  refer 
our  readers  to  the  many  instances  we  have  selected  in 
another  part  of  this  work. 

4.  It  would  be  very  singular,  if  the  word  hades^  which 
occurs  eleven  times  in  the  New  Testament,  sixty  times 
in  the  Septuagint,  twenty  times  in  the  Apocrypha,  and 
its  equivalent  word  sJieol^  sixty-four  times  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament ;  in  all,  one  hundred  and  ninety -nine  times ;  and 
in  one  hundred  and  ninety-eight  places  certainly  implies 
a  state  of  death  :  it  would  be  strange  indeed,  if  in  our 
text,  it  should  imply  that  hades  is  actually  a  place  of  life 
and  torment ;  and  especially,  when  in  the  very  same  text 
it  is  said — of  the  person  to  whom  the  actions  of  life  are 
attributed,  "77/^  rich  m.an  also  died."  The  person  who 
can  insist  on  this  must  be  most  thoroughly  imbued  with 
the  semi-pagan  philosophy  of  the  separate  conscious  ex- 
istence of  the  soul,  and  its  immortality  ;  as  no  allusion 
is  made  to  the  soul  as  a  separate  thing,  but  to  the  rich 
man  himself  and  Lazarus  himself,  acting  in  a  figure, 
through  the  instrumentality  of  material  organs,  such  as 
eyes,  ears,  fingers,  and  tongues, 

OF  GEHENNA,  TOPHET,  AND  THE  VALLEY"  OF  HINNOM. 

In  the  received  Greek  text,  the  word  Gehenna  occurs 
twelve  times,  and  is  translated  hell  in  every  place.  It  is 
not  a  Greek  word — ^it  does  not  occur  in  any  classic  au- 
thor ;  it  is  merely  the  Grecian  mode  of  spelling  the  He- 
brew words  which  are  translated,  *  The  Valley  of  Hin- 
nom.'  Parkhurst  considers  that  as  the  Septuagint 
translate,  or  rather  spell  in  Greek  letters,  without  trans- 
lating gee  or  gaij  a  valley,  and  Hinnom,  a  man's  name,  in 
Josh.  18 :  16,  by  Gaihenna^  so  the  Gehenna  of  the  N. 


216  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION, 

T.  is  in  like  manner  a  corruption  of  the  same  Hebrew 
W'ords,  Gee^  a  valley,  and  Hinnorn^  the  person  who  was 
once  the  possessor  of  it.  So  we  may  consider  the  word 
as  Hebrew  with  nothing  of  Greek  about  it,  except  the 
spelling.  Our  translators  have  no  more  authorit}'-  for 
translating  gelienna  by  hell^  than  they  would  have  had 
for  translating  Sodom  or  Gomorrha,  hell.  The  word  is 
seldom  translated  in  the  foreign  versions.  Stuart,  Clarke, 
Schleusner,  and  all  critics  are  agreed  upon  the  origin  of 
this  w^ord. 

The  valley  of  Hinnom  was  a  delightful  vale  planted 
with  trees,  watered  by  fountains,  on  the  south-east  of  Je» 
rusalem,  by  the  torrent  Kedron,  Here  the  idolatrous 
kings  of  Judah  placed  the  brazen  image  of  Moloch,  which 
had  the  face  of  a  calf,  but  the  rest  resembled  a  man  with 
extended  arms.  The  idolatrous  Jews  were  accustomed 
to  sacrifice,  not  only  doves,  rams,  calves,  and  bulls,  but 
often  their  own  children.  This  valley  was  hkewise  call- 
ed  Tophct^  a  detestation,  ao  abomination  ;  from  Toph^  to 
vomit  with  loathing.  Others  derive  it  from  Toph^  a 
drum  ;  because  the  perpetrators  of  these  horrible  sacri- 
fices, beat  drums  that  the  shrieks  of  the  infants  who  were 
burned,  should  not  be  heard.  The  pious  king  Josiah 
caused  it  to  be  polluted,  and  made  a  place  of  desecration, 
of  loathing,  and  horror.  There  were  cast  all  kinds  of 
filth,  together  with  the  carcases  of  beasts,  and  the  un- 
buried  bodies  of  criminals  who  had  been  executed.  Con- 
tinual fires  were  necessary,  in  order  to  consume  these, 
lest  the  putrefaction  should  infect  the  air;  and  there 
worms  were  ahvays  feeding  on  the  remaining  relics. 
Here  w^e  see  the  origin  of  the  expression,  "  Where  their 
worm  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched," 

This  valley  was  further  signalized  by  two  memorable 
occurrences.  The  army  of  Sennacherib,  consisting  of 
185,000  men,  were  slain  in  one  night,  and  their  bodies 
consumed  by  fire.  And  also  the  Babylonians  made  a 
great  slaughter  of  the  idolatrous  Jews ;  aud  their  car- 
cases, more  than  could  be  buried,  were  left  a  prey  to  the 
birds  of  the  air,  and  the  beasts  of  the  field.  The  place 
seems  to  have  been  used  as  a  place  of  punishment,  and 
likewise,  as  a  place  where  the  dead  bodies  of  criminals 
w^ere  buried  or  burned.  That  the  Jews  associated  this 
place  with  the  idea  of  future  punishment  is  very  likely ; 


^JEHESTNA VALLEY    OP   HJNNOM.  217 

?ind  that  tlie}^  may  iiave  coDsidered  it  tbe  very  spot 
where,  according  to  their  own  prophets,  thei^  should 
he  a  great  gathering  of  the  nations  to  judgment  is  more 
than  proba-bie.  if  the  reader  will  ca«t  his  eye  on  the 
■map  of  Jerusalem,  he  wiill  perceive  that  the  locality  wiU 
^gree  with  many  things  relating  to  a  future  judgment. 

The  Valley  of  Jehoshaphat  is  on  the  east  of  Jerusalem-, 
>and  is  called  the  Valley  of  Judgment.  Jehoshaphat 
means  "  The  Lord  judge."  A-s  tbe  feet  -of  Christ  are  to 
«tand  on  the  Mount  @f  OHves  ^''  in  that  day ^''  we  can  per 
ceive,  that  ^s  the  mountains  rise  behind,  his  face  will  be 
towards  Jerusalem  ;  and  if  the  nations  are  gathered  be- 
fore him,  in  tbe  Valley  of  Jelwshaphat,  Gehenna  will  be 
on  his  left  hand  ;  and  there  probably  many  of  tl:>e  wicked 
nations  will  be  consumed  with  fire  from  heaven. 

We  are  now  to  enquire,  Whether  the  fires  of  Gehenna 
that  are  to  destroy  the  wicked  will  be  perpetual  ?  We 
reply,  Na  I.  iBecause  tbe  word  a^o?^  o,nd  awnas^  trans- 
lated everlasting,  for  ever,  &»c.,  do  not  necessarily  imply 
this.  2.  Because  the  burned  eities  of  Sodom  and  Go- 
morrha,  that  are  -feet  forth  as  an  example,  "  that  have  suf- 
fered the  vengeance  of  eternal  fire,"  do  not  continue  to 
burn.  3,  Because  the  whole  land,  in  a  cleansed  state,- 
has  been  solemnly  deeded  to  Abraham  and  to  his  seed, 
which  is  Ghrist,  and  unless  they  possess  the  whole,  this 
^>romise  ^vill  fail.  4.  Because  the  cleansing  of  the  dead 
sea,  caused  by  the  destruction  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrha, 
is  a  matter  of  specific  promise ;  affording  presumptive 
evidence  that  Gehenna  wiR  be  cleansed  likewise.  5.  Be- 
cause as  tbe  wicked  are  to  be  burned  up,  devoured,  con- 
sumed, killed,  destroyed,  to  suffer  the  complete  extinc- 
tion of  their  beiHg,  the  fires  having  accomplished  their 
work,  will  not  be  needed,  6.  Because  the  existence  of 
Si  perpetual  valley  of  fire  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  the 
righteous,  that  had  been  used  for  tbe  destruction  of  tbe 
wicked,  would  mar  tbe  happiness  of  tbe  redeemed.  7.. 
And,  because  there  are  no  passages  of  Scripture,  w^hich, 
when  properly  expounded,  teach  that  the  fires  of  Gehen- 
na will  be  perpetual. 

As  Gehenna  in  the  N,  T.  is  used  ^<^t  Topbet,  and  the 
Valley  of  Hinnom,  in  the  0.  T.,  it  will  be  necessary  first 
to  trace  the  meaning  of  these  terms  in  the  Scriptures  of 
the  0.  T 


218  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

The  locality  of  Gehenna  is  recorded  in  Josh,  15  :  8, 
"  And  the  border  (of  the  lot  of  Judah)  went  up  by  the 
Valley  of  Hinnom  unto  the  south  side  of  the  Jebusite  ; 
the  same  is  Jerusalem  ;  and  the  border  went  up  the  top 
of  the  mountain  that  Heth  before  the  Valley  of  Hinnonh 
westward,  which  is  at  the  end  of  the  valley  of  the  giants 
northward."  Josh.  18:16.  The  lot  of  Benjamin,  "  The 
border  came  down  to  the  end  of  the  mountain  that  lietb 
before  the  valley  of  the  son  of  Hinnom^  and  which  is  in 
the  valley  of  the  giants  on  the  north,  and  descended  to 
the  Valley  of  Hinnom,  to  the  side  of  Jebusi  on  the  soutby 
and  descended  to  En-nogeL"     Jer.  19  :  2. 

Pollution  of  Gehenna  J  1  Kings  H  :  7,"  Then  did  Solo- 
mon build  a  high  place  for  Chemosh,  the  abomination  of 
Moab,  in  the  hill  that  is  before  Jerusalem^  and  for  Mo- 
lech,  the  abomination  of  the  children  of  Ammon.'^  2 
Chron.  28  :  3,  Ahaz  "  burnt  incense  in  the  valley  of  the 
son  of  Hinnom^  and  burnt  his  children  in  the  fire^  after  the 
abominations  of  the  heathen  whom  the  Lord  had  cast  out 
before  the  children  of  Is^rael."  2  Chron.  33 :  6,  "  Manas- 
seh  caused  his  children  to  pass  through  the  jfire  in  the 
valley  of  the  son  of  Hinnom  .*"  also  he  observed  times,  and 
used  enchantments,,  aad  used  witchcraft,  and  dealt  with 
a  familiar  spii  it  y  Sind  with  wizards:  he  wrought  much 
evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,  to  provoke  him  to  anger. 

The  desecratimi  of  Gehenna.  2  Kings  23  :  10,  "  And 
Josiah  defiled  Tophet,  which  is  in  the  valley  of  the 
children  of  Hinnom,  that  no  man  might  make  his  son  or 
his  daughter  to  pass  through  the  fmre  to  Molech."  That 
Gehenna  w^as  afterwards  made  a  receptacle  for  filth  we 
gather  from  the  Rabbins.  AVe  likewise  read  of  the  de- 
secration of  the  brook  Kidron^  that  ran  through  the  val- 
ley of  Hinnom. 

Gehenna  was  a  place  of  punishment  by  bterning.  Lev. 
20  :  14,  "  If  a  man  take  a  wife  and  her  mother,  it  is  wick- 
edness :  they  shall  be  burnt  with  fire^hothhe  and  they." 
In  the  2d  to  6th  v,  the  people  of  the  land  were  to  destroy 
the  worshippers  of  Molech,  w^hich  was  probaWy  done  in 
Gehenna,  where  the  image  was  placed.  Lev,  20:  9,, 
The  daughter  of  any  priest  that  profaned  herself,  was  to 
be  bv.rned  with  fire, 

Jer  7  :  30,  ^'^  The  children  of  Judah  have  done  evil  in 
my  sight,  saith  the  Lord....they  have  built   the  high 


GEHENNA ^VALLEY    OP   HINNOM.  219 

places  of  Tophet^  vjhich  is  i7t  the  valley  of  the  son  of  Hin- 
noTTij  to  burn  their  sons  and  their  daughters  in  the  fire... 
Therefore  behold  the  days  come,  saith  the  Lord,  that  it 
shall  no  more  be  called  Tophet^  nor  the  valley  of  the  son 
of  Hinnom^  but  the  valley  of  slaughter  :  for  they  shall 
bury  in  Tophet  till  there  be  no  place.  And  the  carcases 
of  this  people  shall  be  meat  for  the  fowls  of  heaven,  and 
for  the  beasts  of  the  earth  ;  and  none  shall  fray  them 
away." 

Let  the  reader  here  read,  also,  the  following  passages. 
Jer  19  :  1-13  ;  32  :  35  ;  48  :  8  ;  Isa.  30  :  30-33. 

In  Gehenna  the  army  of  Sennacherib  wa^  destroyed, 
2  Kings  19  :  35. 

Joel  3  :  2,  "  I  will  also  gather  all  nations,  and  will  bring 
.  them  down  into  the  valley  of  Jehoshaphat,  and  will  plead 
with  them  there  for  my  people  and  for  my  heritage  Is- 
rael, whom  they  have  scattered  among  the  nations,  and 
parted  my  land." 

Ezek.  38  and  39  c,  and  Eev.  16:  16,  relate  to  destruc- 
tions apparently  to  occur  in  other  places. 

From  histories  and  prophecies  we  perceive  that  Ge- 
henna has  been,  and  is  to  be  a  place  of  punishment ;  and 
as  it  has  been,  so  it  may  be  again,  a  place  of  punishment 
by  fire ;  but  it  is  not  a  place  where  the  wicked  are  now 
bemg  punished,  nor  will  it  ever  be  a  place  where  the 
wicked  shall  be  kept  alive  in  perpetual  torments,  God 
surnamed  the  place.  The  Valley  of  Slaughter.  To  affirm 
that  the  wicked  are  to  be  kept  aUve  there  for  ever,  is  to 
charge  God  with  naming  the  place  inappropriately  ! 

We  are  now  prepared  to  examine  the  meaning  of  Ge- 
henna^ in  the  N.  T.  We  have  said  that  the  word  occurs 
twelve  times  ;  but  it  is  not  recorded  of  Christ  that  he 
used  it  twelve  times,  and  he  is  the  only  person  who  used 
the  word  in  the  N.  T.  ;  and  only  to  the  Jews,  who  un- 
derstood its  import.  In  Jam.  3:6,"  The  tongue  is  a 
fire,  a  world  of  iniquity  :  so  is  the  tongue  among  our 
members,  that  it  defileth  the  whole  body,  and  setteth  on 
fire  the  course  of  nature;  and  it  is  set  on  fire  of  hell." 
"  Hupo  tcs  geennZs  ;"  set  on  fire  of  Gehenna.  But  the 
Vatican  MS.  and  several  of  the  more  ancient  MSS.  read, 
li/upo  tts  genms  ;  kindled  in  the  bjrth.  ( Genna  for  gC' 
nea  ;  see  Steph.  Lex.)  The  same  idea  may  be  found  in 
Ps.  58  :  3,  "  The  wicked  are  estranged  from  the  Avomb  : 


220  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

they  go  astray  as  soon  as  they  he  born,  speaking  lies." 
It  was  easy  for  transcribers  to  have  mistaken  these  two 
words  in  Greek.  Consult  Steph.  Th.  Gr.  torn.,  4  p.  672, 
and  Valpy,  torn.  1,  p.  400,  word  Gehenna.  "  The  tongue 
is  a  fire  :  as  the  tongue  engenders  or  inflames  its  succes- 
sors {tes  geneseoSy)  so  it  is  engendered  or  inflamed  by  its 
predecessors  (hupo  genms)^  Thus  geneseos  extends  its 
eense  and  its  efiicacy  equally  to  the  following  connection 
oi  genms  for  geennls. 

The  word  Gehenna  then  is  no  where  used  in  the  whole 
Greek  Scriptures,  Old  and  New,  except  by  our  Lord  him- 
self, and  only  in  his  parabolical  discourses,  in  Matthew, 
Mark,  and  Luke.  See  Penn's  Translation  of  The  New 
Covenant,  hkewise  his  Annotations. 

As  the  same  conversations  are  recorded  by  the  difie- 
rent  Evangelists,  we  suppose  that  Christ  used  the  word 
Gehenna  eight  times  only,  recorded  mfour  conversations. 

Mat.  5:21,  "Ye  have  heard  that  it  was  said  by  them  of 
old  time.  Thou  shalt  not  kill ;  and  whosoever  shall  kill, 
shall  be  in  danger  of  the  judgment :  But  I  say  unto  you, 
That  whoseover  is  angry  with  his  brother  without  a  cause, 
shall  be  in  danger  of  the  judgment-:  and  whosoever  shall 
say  to  his  brother,  Eaca,  shall  be  in  danger  of  the  coun- 
cil: but  whosoever  shall  say.  Thou  fool,  shall  be  in  danger 
of  hell  fire." 

Whosoever  shall  say,  tnbre,  enoqjios  estai  eis  tm  gehen- 
"nan  tou  puros :  Mweh,  or  Fool,  or  Apostate !  will  be 
deserving  of  the  fire  of  Gehenna  ;  or  will  deserve  to  be 
burned  in  the  valley  of  Hinnom. 

Here  are  three  crimes  of  different  degrees  of  enormity 
which  Christ  declared  deserved  to  be  punished  with  three 
different  degrees  of  severity.  1.  Rash  and  needless  an- 
ger towards  a  brother.  This  deserved  the  judgment  of 
the  lower  court,  even  as  he  who  *  killed.'  This  lower 
court  consisted  of  a  council  of  twenty-three  who  had 
power  in  some  cases  to  inflict  death  in  a  mild  manner. — 
2.  The  using  of  offensive  terms  regarding  a  brother,  such 
as  Raca,  a  vain  and  empty  fellow,  deserved  such  punish- 
ment as  the  Sanhedrin,  or  great  council  of  the  nation, 
could  inflict,  such  as  stoning.  3.  But  the  holding  of  a 
worthy  brother  up  to  the  world  as  a  vile  apostate  from 
Christ,  deserved  the  punishment  of  burning  in  the  valley 
of  Hinnom.     We  suppose  this  to  be  the  meaning  of  this 


GEHENNA    WHOLLY    (.'ONSUMES.  221 

passage  That  every  guilty  action  is  liable  to  an  appro- 
priate and  corresponding  degree  of  punishment.  As 
punishment  was  inflicted  by  the  Sanhedrin^  of  burning 
m  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  it  is  possible  that  our  Savior 
alludes  to  such  punishments  only.  We  have  no  proof 
that  he  alluded  here  to  any  punishment  to  take  place 
after  the  resurrection  ;  but  if  he  had  such  reference,  he 
used  such  burnings  as  were  usually  practised  there,  as 
a  pattern  of  such  a  burning  as  should  then  take  place  ; 
which,  though  terrible  enough,  would  necessarily  soon 
terminate  in  the  consumption  and  the  utter  extinction  of 
the  being  of  the  suflerer — a  deprivation  of  all  conscious-  • 
ness. 

Mat.  5  :  29,  "  Therefore,  if  thy  right  eye  insnare  thee, 
pluck  it  out,  and  throw  it  away :  for  it  is  better  for  thee 
to  lose  one  of  thy  members,  than  that  thy  whole  body  be 
cast  into  hell^  ( Gehenna).  And  if  thy  right  hand  insnare 
thee,  cut  it  off,  and  throw  it  away  :  it  is  better  for  thee 
to  lose  one  of  thy  members,  than  that  thy  whole  body  be 
cast  in  hell^  {Gehenna)^  18:  8,  "Wherefore,  if  thy 
hand,  or  thy  foot  insnare  tbee,  cut  it  off,  and  throw  it 
away  ;  it  is  better  for  thee  to  enter  lame  or  maimed  into 
life,  than  having  two  hands  or  two  feet  to  be  cast  into 
[to pur  to  aio?iion)  the  fire  of  the  age.  9  v.  And  if  thine 
eye  insnare  thee,  pluck  it  out,  and  throw  it  away ;  it  is 
better  for  thee  to  enter  one-eyed  into  hfe,  than  having 
two  eyes  to  be  cast  into  {ten  gehennan  tou  puros)  the 
Gehenna  of  fire."  Mark  9  :  43-49.  In  recording  this 
conversation,  Mark  adds  to  the  words  of  Matthew  (eis 
to  pur  to  asbesto?i,  twice)  "  into  the  fire  the  unquencha- 
ble." And  three  times,  "  Where  their  worm  dieth  not 
and  their  fire  is  not  quenched."  The  first  addition  is  of 
very  doubtful  authority,  and  the  second  addition  should 
occur  but  once  in  the  48  v.  as  the  other  two  places  are 
not  found  in  any  of  the  ancient  MSS.  S.  L.  (hie  etiam, 
V.  43).  The  transcribers,  since  the  7th  century,  have 
tried  their  hands  so  much  in  the  embellishment  of  the 
43d  to  50th  verse,  that  they  have  involved  the  authority 
of  the  whole  in  doubt ;  still  we  shall  treat  the  whole  as 
if  it  were  genuine. 

Professor  Stuart  places  no  reliance  upon  these  pas- 
sages to  prove  the  existence  of  a  hell  of  fire,  either  now 
or  hereafter.     Certainly  they  cannot  be  made  compatible 


222  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

with  his  notion  of  the  continued  existence  of  the  soul  in 
torment.  The  whole  may  be  intended  to  set  forth  by 
eimihtudes,  that  it  is  better  to  make  any  sacrifices,  even 
to  the  most  valuable  of  oui  members,  if  they  are  likely 
to  insnare  us  from  duty  rather  than  fail  to  obtain  eternal 
life.  Part  with  the  most  fondly  cherished,  and  seeming- 
ly valuable  acquisition,  if  its  tendency  is  detrimental  to 
your  Christian  character,  and  live  for  ever ;  keep  it,»and 
become  insnared  by  it,  and  you  subject  yourself  to  the 
fire  of  Gehenna.  Here  is  life,  and  the  dreadful  depriva- 
tion of  life,  contrasted,  and  as  the  life  refers  to  a  future 
state,  so  the  punishment  of  death  refers  to  a  future  state. 
Not  a  word  is  said  here  about  the  soul^  in  the  burning 
up  of  the  body  in  Gehenna ;  but  the  soul^  or  beings  is 
necessarily  implied  as  being  hkewise  burned  or  utterly 
destroyed.  Hence  we  are  directed,  "  To  fear  him  who  is 
able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body,  (both  life  and  being,) 
in  Gehenna^  The  argument  of  our  Savior  is  this :  It 
is  better  to  have  a  part  of  us  destroyed,  than  to  have  the 
whole  being  destroyed,  which  must  result  from  the  whole 
body  being  cast  into  the  fires  of  Gehenna.  If  the  soul, 
as  a  separate  living  entity,  were  not  destroyed  by  this 
process,  the  argument  of  our  Savior  would  be  invalida- 
ted. For  then  w^e  might  still  live  after  our  whole  body 
had  been  burned,  as  modern  theology  teaches.  But 
Christ  teaches  that  the  destruction  of  the  whole  body 
involves  the  total  extermination  of  life.  The  punishment 
that  had  been  inflicted  in  Gehenna  on  many,  is  made  the 
symbol  of  the  punishment  that  will  be  inflicted  by  Christ 
at  the  judgment.  The  punishments  that  have  taken 
place  in  Gehenna,  destroyed  life,  and  the  torment  was 
never  protracted  beyond  a  day,  so  the  punishment 
that  will  take  place  in  Gehenna  will  destroy  life  in  a 
Umited  period. 

But  the  common  version  of  Mat.  18:8,  speaks  of 
''-  everlasting  fire."  Even  supposing  the  original  would 
bear  this  construction,  it  would  only  imply  that  the  in- 
strument of  the  punishment  would  be  perpetual ;  but  we 
shall  show  presently  that  some  of  these  "  everlasting 
fires"  have  already  been  extinguished.  "  Who  can  dwell, 
or  Hve,  with  everlasting  burnings  ?"  Isa.  33  :  14.  Clear- 
ly none  ;  for  the  obvious  reason,  they  would  be  totally 
consumed.     Allowing  the  words,  "  Where  their  worm 


OEHENNA  WHOLLY  CONSUMES,  223 

dieth  not>,  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched,"  to  be  genuine 
In  one  place  ^  and  what  then  ?  Then  the  passage  more 
surely  teaches  the  destruction  of  the  wicked  that  are  cast 
therein,  for  that  whieh  escapes  the  fire,  the  worms  will 
consume ;  and  when  there  is  nothing  for  the  fire  and  the 
worms  to  consume,  then  the  fire  and  the  worms  will 
themselves  become  extinct 

This  is  a  quotation  from  Isa,  66 :  2a,  "  And  it  -shall 
come  to  pass,  that  from  one  new  moon  to  anoth^  and 
from  one  Sabbath  to  another,  shall  all  flesh  come  to  wor- 
ship before  me,  saith  the  Lord.  And  they  shall  go  forth 
and  look  upon  the  carcasses  of  the  men  that  have  trans- 
gressed againsi:  me  :  for  tlieir  worm  shall  not  die,  neither 
ehall  their  fire  be  quenched  ;  and  they  shall  be  an  abhor- 
ring unto  all  flesh  ;"  till,  of  course,  the  carcases  are  en- 
tirely consumed  •  for  few  will  contend  that  carcasses  are 
indestructibie. 

To  show  the  sense  in  which  the  Greeks  used  the  Scrip- 
ture phrases  of  ^'eis  to  pur  to  (isbeston^'^''  and  *•'-  puri  asbes- 
tOy^''  the  fire  the  unquenchable,  we  quote  from  the  Bible 
Examiner  the  language  of  a  learned  Christian  Bishop, 
near  the  time  of  Christ. 

Eusebius,  who  is  supposed  to  have  be^i  born  at 
Cesanea.  A.  D..  267^  and  of  which  city  he  became  Bishop 
in  315.,  in  his  history  of  the  Christian  Church,  which  has 
gained  for  him  the  title  of  the  Father  of  Ecclesiastical 
History,  gives  an  account  of  tJie  martyrdom  of  such  of 
the  saints  as  had  suffered  death  for  the  gospel's  sake.  In 
his  history,  book  vi.,  ch.  41,  he  gives  an  account  of  those 
who  were  martyred  at  Alexandria,  He  speaks  of  them 
as  follows  :  ^'  The  first  of  these  was  Juhan,  a  man  afl[lict- 
ed  with  the  gout,  neither  able  to  walk  nor  stand,  who, 
with  two  others  that  carried  him,  was  arraigned.  Of 
these,  the  one  immediately  denied,  but  the  other,  named 
Cronion,  surnaraed  Eunus,  and  the  aged  Julian  himself, 
iaaving  confessed  the  Lord,  was  carried  on  camels 
throughout  the  city — a  very  large  one  as  you  know — 
and  in  this  elevation  were  scourged,  and  finally  consumed 
in  an  immense^re^  {puri  asbesto).  After  these,  Epima- 
chus  and  Alexander,  who  had  continued  for  a  long  time 
in  prison,  enduring  innumerable  suffering  from  the 
scourges  and  scrapers,  were  also  destroyed  in  an  im- 
mensejire^'^  {puri  asbesto). 


224  BIBLE   VS.    TRADinOlT. 

Here,  theiiy  we  have  the  same  phrase  that  is  irsed  m 
the  Bible,  used  by  a  learned  and  eloquent  Christian 
Bishop  only  about  three  hundred  years  after  Christ ;  and 
no  reader  cau  be  at  loss  to  understand  its  import  in  the 
connection.  No  one  can  fail  to  see  that  the  expression 
"  unquenchable  fire"  affords  no  support  to  the  commou 
theory  of  eternal  torment — ^but  instead  of  that  it  is  used 
to  denote  a  fire  that  utterly  consumes  whatever  is  sub- 
mitted to  its  action.  If  the  expression  puri  asbesto  proves 
that  the  wicked  will  be  tormented  eternally,  then  jEuse- 
bias  taught  that  the  martyrs  had  l>een  tormented  eternal- 
ly. If  Eusebius  taught  that  the  martyrs  were  burned  ta 
ashes,  then  John  the  Baptist  and  Jesus  Christ  declared 
that  wicked  men  should  be  thus  burned  in  Gehenna. 

Surely  Eusebius  does  not  teach  that  the  martyrs  wil5 
be  tormented  eternally  1  L 

Mat.  23:  15, "Woe  unto  yon,  scribes  and  Pharisees^ 
hypocrites  !  for  ye  compass  sea  and  land  to  make  one 
proselyte,  and  when  he  is  made,  ye  make  him  two-fold 
more  the  child  of  heU  than  yourselves."  A  child  of  Ge- 
henna. 

V.  33,  '^  Ye  serpents,  ?/^ generation  of  vipers^how  can  ye 
escape  the  damnation  of  hell  ?"  Gehenna,  Son  of  Ge- 
henna means  one  deserving  of,  or  doomed  to  Gehenna. 
Both  passages  teach  the  utter  destruction  of  these  hypo- 
crites in  Gehenna. 

Our  Savior,  foretelling  the  persecutions"  that  should 
come  upon  his  disciples,  and  assuring  them  of  the  con- 
tinual providence  of  God,  warns  them  against  apostacy. 

Mat  10  :  26-28,.  "  Fear  them  not  therefore  :  for  there 
is  nothing  covered^  that  shall  not  be  revealed;  and  hid^ 
that  shall  not  be  known.  What  I  tell  you  in  darkness,. 
that  speak  ye  in  light :  and  what  ye  hear  in  the  ear,  that 
preach  ye  upon  the  house-tops.  And  fear  not  thena 
which  kill  the  body^  but  are  not  able  to  kill  the  soul : 
but  rather  fear  him  which  i&  able  to  destroy  both  soul 
and  body  in  hell."     In  Gehenna. 

Luke  12  :  4^  5,  "  And  I  say  unto  you>  my  friends.  Be 
not  afraid  of  them  that  kill  the  body,  and  after  that,  have 
no  more  that  they  can  do.  But  I  will  forewarn  you 
whom  ye  shall  fear  :  Fear  him,  which  after  he  hath  killed^ 
hath  power  to  cast  into  hell ;  yea,  I  say  unto  you,  Fear 
him."     To  cast  into  Gehenna. 


GEHENNA   WHOLLY    CONSUMES.  ^25 

Matthew,  who  wrote  in  the  Hebrew  idiom,  uses  the 
term  soul  and  body,  as  comprehending  the  whole  being 
which  only  God  could  kill  so  as  never  to  be  raised  to  life 
again.  But  Luke,  who  wrote  in  purer  Greek,  in  relating 
the  same  discourse,  omits  the  term  soul.  Harwood 
translates  Mat.  10:  28,  thus  :  "  Pear  not  those  who  can 
only  inflict  upon  you  bodily  pain  and  torture,  and  deprive 
you  of  a  precarious  being — but  whose  power  extends  no 
farther.  But  let  that  great  Being  be  the  object  of  your 
fear,  who  can  involve  both  soul  and  body  in  total  and 
everlasting  destruction.  Let  that  Being,  I  repeat  it,  be 
the  object  of  your  constant  fear." 

This  rendering,  we  think,  expresses  the  true  idea. 
These  are  the  two  passages  in  the  N.  T.  which  being 
parallel,  are  equal  only  to  one,  that  Professor  Stuart 
thinks  teach  eternal  torments.  None  but  those  who  are 
completely  blinded  by  the  idea  of  the  immortality  of  the 
soul,  would  ever  think  of  finding  it  in  these  passages. — 
The  one  plainly  teaches  that  God  is  able  to  destroy  the 
soul^  and  clearly  intimates,  if  the  warning  be  not  heeded, 
that  he  will  do  it :  that  he  will  destroy  the  soul  and  body ; 
that  is,  both  life  and  being  in  Gehenna.  Men  might  kill 
the  body  or  person,  for  a  time ;  but  could  not  prevent 
his  resurrection  to  hfe  again  :  but  God  could  not  only 
kill,  or  take  away  the  hfe  we  at  present  have  from  Adam, 
but  could  destroy  him  altogether.  This  destruction 
would  be  an  everlasting  destruction. 

Eev.  W.  G.  Moncrieff,  Edinburg,  observes,  that,  "The 
only  legitimate  mode  of  interpreting  the  text  is,  in  our 
opinion,  to  understand  it  as  affirming  that  God  only  can 
destroy  a  soul,  a  life,  a  human  being's  existence  for  ever  ; 
and  that  this  will  be  the  doom  of  all  apostates  and  of  all 
the  ungodly.  Persecutors  may  destroy  a  Christian's  hfe 
now,  and  for  a  little,  but,  at  "  the  last  day,"  he  will  be 
raised  to  '  glory,  honor,  and  immortality.'  When  God 
destroys  a  man,  a  soul,  a  life,  or  a  living  being  in  Gehen- 
na,  he  is  quenched  for  ever ;  the  second  death  is  to  be 
followed  by  no  resurrection.  ^  He  who  findeth  his  Hfe,' 
he  who  keeps  his  life  at  the  expense  of  his  love  to  Jesus, 
shall  at  last  lose  it  in  Gehenna's  fire  ;  and  he  that  loseth 
bis  life  {pmchen\  or  lays  it  down  for  Jesus,  shall  find  it 
at  the  resurrection  ^f  the  just,  and  retain  it  through  un- 
ending ages." 


J326  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

We  bave  now  examined  every  passage  where  Gehenna 
IS  named,  and  we  find  no  expression  indicating  that  the 
wicked  will  be  kept  alive  in  torments ;  but  we  do  find  a 
place  where  they  will  be  miserably  destroyed.  Please 
remember,  that  Paul  and  his  confederates,  though  they 
preached  "  the  ivhole  counsel  of  God,^''  and  kept  back  no- 
thing that  was  profitable,"  never  preached  '  a  Gehenna^ 
to  the  Gentiles  ;  neither  does  it  appear  that  all  the  wick- 
ed will  ultimately  be  destroyed  in  that  particular  place  : 
while  it  does  appear  that,  that  place  must  be  thoroughly 
cleansed  from  all  its  abominations,  in  the  restitution. — 
Jesus  Christ,  in  referring  to  Gehenna,  in  his  four  para- 
bohc  discourses  to  the  Jews,  undoubtedly  referred  to 
Tophet,  or  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  as  a  place  for  the  exe- 
cution of  death,  in  a  shameful  and  an  accursed  manner, 
by  burning. 


This  phrase  will  not  countenance  the  dogma  of  endless 
misery.  It  occurs  ^\q  times  :  all  in  that  highly  symboli- 
cal book  the  Apocalipse ;  viz..  Rev.  19  :  20  ;  20  :  10,  14, 
15;  21  :  8.  In  three  of  these  passages  symbols  of  sys- 
tems are  prophesied  of,  and  in  two  of  them  the  wicked 
are  spoken  of  as  suftering  in  the  lake  of  fire  the  second 
death.  The  lake  of  fire  then  symbolizes  the  entire  des- 
truction of  whatever  is  cast  into  it.  So  if  wicked  men 
are  cast  into  it,  they  must  necessarily  be  burned  up. — 
For,  "  who  can  dwell  (or  live)  with  perpetual  burnings  ?" 
We  quote  all  the  passages.  Kev.  19  :  20,  *'  And  the  wild 
beast  was  taken,  and  with  him  the  false  prophet.. ..These 
both  were  cast  alive  into  the  lake  of  fire  burning  with 
sulphur.  And  the  remnant  were  slain  with  the  sword  of 
him  that  sat  upon  the  horse,  which  sword  proceeded  out 
of  his  mouth  :  and  all  the  fowls  of  the  air  were  filled  with 
their  flesh."  Observe  here  that  the  beast  and  the  false 
prophet  were  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire,  while  their  armies 
of  men  were  eaten  by  the  fowls,  and  were  not  burned. 
Rev.  20 :  9,  "  And  they  (the  nations)  went  up  on  the 
breadth  of  the  earth,  and  compassed  the  camp  of  the 
saints  about,  and  the  beloved  city  :  and //r^  came  down 
from  God  out  of  heaven,  and  devoured  them.  And  the 
devil  that  deceived  them  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  the 


LAKE   OF    FIRE.  227 

fire  and  sulphur^  where  [are]  the  wild  beast  and  t^e  false 
prophet,  or  the  propound er  of  false  doctrine,  (kai  basa- 
nisthesontai  hetneras  kai  nuktos,)  and  they  shall  be  tor- 
mented, or  tried,  day  and  night,  (eis  tons  aidnas  ton 
aiunun,)  until  the  ages  of  ages."  The  preposition  m,  as  a 
secondary  meaning,  denotes  motion  towards^  or  tendency^ 
so  as  to  arrive  at,  and  then  should  be  rendered  to  or  i^ito, 
when  applied  to  place ;  and  untii^  when  applied  to  time ; 
as  kai  elthen  eis  gen  Israel.  Eis  here  refers  to  place,  and 
came  to^  or  into^  the  land  of  Israel.  JEis  eelion  katadunta 
dainuntai.  Render  eis  here  as  referring  to  time,  they 
feast  until  sunset.  Our  text  referring  to  thiie,  we  trans- 
late according  to  the  rule,  until  the  ages  of  the  ages^ 
which  rendering  is  strictly  literal.  (See  Erving  Gram- 
mar, p.  149.)  The  word  basinisthesontai^  is  the  future 
tense  plural  of  basanoSj  a  touch-stone  to  try  metals,  and 
means  a  trial,  inquiry,  or  examination,  to  ascertain  the 
genuineness,  or  purity  of  any  thing — hence,  metaphori- 
cally the  word  is  used  for  an  examination  to  obtain  proof, 
to  confirm  any  fact — torture  employed  to  obtain  evidence, 
or  extort  truth — a  proof  given,  or  obtained,  a  pledge  : — 
Dounai  tibasance^  to  submit  any  thing  to  trial,  to  put  to 
proof — dounai  basanon^  to  give  proof  of  any  thing  : — the 
plural  basanoi,  instruments  of  torture  used  to  extort  con- 
fessions. Now  if  the  lake  of  fire  is  used  as  a  figure,  as  in 
1  Pet.  4  :  12,  *^  Think  it  not  strange  concerning  the  fiery 
trial  that  is  to  try  you" ;  and  1  :  7 ;  1  Cor.  3 :  13,  and 
Eev.  3  :  10,  then  ba^anisthesontai.,  should  be  rendered, 
they  shall  be  tried.  And  the  verse  will  mean  that  whatever 
is  symbolized  by  the  beast  and  the  false  prophet  and  the 
dragon  shall  be  tried  till  the  end  of  the  age.  But  if  the 
fire  here  be  taken  as  literal,  then  it  will  most  certainly 
imply  the  complete  destruction  of  the  things  cast  into  it. 

The  word  baziyiizo  is  rendered ^055e<^,  in  Mat.  14  :  24. 
*  Tossed  with  waves ;  and  toiling^  in  Mark  6  :  48.  In 
Luke  16  :  23,  28,  it  might  be  rendered  "  tried  by  torture." 
If  the  dragon  and  Satan,  is  here  intended  to  represent 
the  literal  devil,  it  is  elsewhere  said  that  he  will  be  de- 
Btroyed.  Heb.  2  :  14 ;  Mark  1 :  24 ;  Luke  4  :  34;  1  John 
3:8. 

Rev.  20:  14,  {Kai  ho  thanatos  kai  ho  hades ^)  And 
death  and  hades,  the  grave,  or  dominion  of  death,  were 
cast  into  the  lake  of  fire.     This  is  the  second  death^  the 


228  BIBLE    VS.  TRADITION. 

lake  of  the  fire.  And  whosoever  was  not  found  wpitten 
in  the  book  of  hfe  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  the  fire. 

Eev.  21  :  8,  "  The  fearful,  and  unbelieving,  and  the 
abominable  and  murderers,  and  whoremongers,  and  sor- 
cerers, and  idolaters,  and  all  liars,  shall  have  their  part 
in  the  lake  which  burneth  with  fire  and  sulphur :  which 
is  the  second  death." 

As  this  second  death  is  a  repetition  of  the  first,  and  as 
the  first  death  must  terminate  before  the  second  can  com- 
mence, and  as  the  first  death  was  not  eternal  misery,  so 
neither  can  the  repetition  be.  As  the  first  death  deprives 
of  conscious  being,  so  will  the  second.  Some  understand 
the  first  death  as  resulting  from  our  connection  with 
Adam,  and  the  second  death  as  resulting  from  our  own 
neglect  to  come  to  Christ,  the  second  Adam, /or  life.  In 
either  case,  the  word  second  is  fatal  to  the  dogma  of  end- 
less torture;  much  more  to  that  unmeaning  phrase^ 
"  the  death  that  never  dies." 

Pire  only  pains  as  it  acts  to  the  destruction  of  living 
substance ;  if  the  fire  did  not  tend  to  destroy  it  would 
not  pain.  To  be  cast  into  a  lake  of  fire  burning  with 
sulphur,  certainly  implies  the  entire  combustion  of  all 
combustible  substances.  And  such  is  man.  Eemember^ 
if  there  be  any  part  of  man  indestructible,  that  part  can- 
not be  pained  or  even  injured  by  fire.  Ajax  was  fabled 
to  have  been  dipped  into  the  river  Styx,  in  the  infernal 
regions,  by  which  he  was  rendered  invulnerable  to  all 
injury,  to  all  pain,  excepting  in  his  right  heel,  by  which 
he  was  held.  But  this  theology  of  fables  we  are  oppos- 
ing, first  endows  the  sinner  with  incorruptibihty  of  na- 
ture and  consequent  immortality — ^thus  rendering  him 
incapable  of  sufiering,  torment, or  decay — and  then  builds 
upon  this  fancied  endowment  the  contradictory  assump- 
tion, that  the  sinner  will  have  eternal  conscious  existence 
in  torments  1  Why,  sir,  if  the  sinner  were  incorruptible, 
fiame  could  not  harm  him ;  hghtning  could  not  scathe 
him ;  he  would  not  be  susceptible  of  sufiering  or  decay 
of  any  kind  ;  and  he  would  be  as  truly  immortal  as  will 
be  the  righteous,  and  as  free  from  pain. 

As  in  these  passages,  death  and  the  grave  are  per- 
sonified, the  fair  conclusion  is,  that  the  fire  here  symbo- 
lizes complete  destruction.  We  are  not  justified  in  mak- 
ing the  one  part  only  symbolical.     Death  and  the  grave, 


THE  LOWER  PARTS  OF  THE  EARTH.         229 

or  hades,  not  being  persons,  must  necessarily  be  made 
figures,  and  so  the  other  must  be  construed  as  figurative 
also.  But  figurative  or  literal,  the  fire  imports  the  de- 
struction of  all  things  cast  into  it,  and  the  death  of  all 
the  living.  The  wild  beast  will  be  prevented  from  de- 
stroying ;  the  dragon  from  deceiving  the  nations ;  and 
the  false  prophet  from  deceiving  God's  people. 

As  the  destruction  of  the  cities  of  Sodom  and  Gomor- 
rha,  with  fire  and  brimstone  from  heaven,  are  set  forth 
as  a  pattern  of  the  aionian  burning,  or  the  burning  at 
that  age,  and  as  the  burning  of  these  produced  the  sul- 
phurous lake  Asphaltites,  or  Dead  Sea,  so  the  final  de- 
struction of  the  wicked  may  produce  another  lake,  which 
may  be  for  a  time  a  lake  of  fire ;  but  as  the  Dead  Sea  is 
to  be  cleansed,  so  Gehenna  and  its  lake  of  fire  will  be 
cleansed  and  delivered  over  to  Abraham  and  to  Christ 
in  a  heavenly  condition,  according  to  the  terms  of  the 
everlasting  covenant. 

THE    LOWER    AND    LOWEST    PARTS    OF    THE    EARTH. 

The  phrase  "  the  lower  parts  of  the  earth,"  is  used  for 
the  sea-coasts,  for  the  islands  of  the  sea,  and  for  the 
grave,  but  never  for  a  place  of  conscious  torment. 

Ps.  63  :  9,  "  But  those  that  seek  my  soul y  to  destroy  ity 
shall  go  into  the  lower  parts  of  the  earth  ;"  (the  grave). 
Isa.  44  :  23,  ''  Sing,  0  ye  heavens  ;  for  the  Lord  hath 
done  it :  shout  ye  lower  parts  of  the  earth  :  break  forth 
into  singing  ye  mountains,  O  forest,  and  every  tree 
therein :  for  the  Lord  hath  redeemed  Jacob,  and  glorifi- 
ed himself  in  Israel."  The  lower  parts  of  the  earth,  in 
this  sublime  poetical  personification,  may  mean  the  sea- 
coasts,  the  valleys,  or  the  grave  opened  at  the  resurrec- 
tion of  its  inmates.  Ps.  139  :  15,  "  My  substance  was 
not  hid  from  thee,  when  I  was  made  in  secret,  and  cu- 
riously wrought  in  the  lowest  parts  of  the  earth."  Here 
the  womb  seems  to  be  imphed.  Eph.  4:9,"  Now  that 
he  (Christ)  ascended,  what  is  it  but  that  he  also  descend- 
ed first  into  the  lower  parts  of  the  earth,"  the  grave : 
for  the  resurrection  of  Christ  is  here  spoken  of :  though 
perhaps  here,  the  phrase,  the  lower  parts  of  the  earth, 
contrasted  with  Christ's  exaltation,  may  mean  no  more 
than  the  deepest  abasement.     The  phrase  occurs  like- 


230  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

wise  in  Ez.  31  c.  and  32  c,  where  it  is  used  interchanga- 
bly  with  grave,  pit,  and  sheol ;  but  no  where  does  it 
mean  a  place  of  conscious  torment. 

THE    WORD    TARTARUS. 

This  word  occurs  but  once  in  the  N.  T.,  viz.,  2  Peter 
2:4,"  For  if  God  spared  not  the  angels  that  sinned,  but 
cast  them  down  to  hell,  and  delivered  them  into  chains 
of  darkness,  to  be  reserved  unto  judgment." 

The  word  translated  hell  here  is  tartarosas.  Observe, 
it  is  7Wt  men,  but  migels  who  are  spoken  of;  and  these 
not  as  now  undergoing  punishment,  but  as  reserved  to 
be  punished  at  a  future  period.  Moreover,  their  chains 
are  chains  of  darkness ;  a  highly  figurative  expression. 
In  the  9th  v.  The  unjust  are  likewise  said  to  be  reserved 
"  unto  the  day  of  judgment  to  be  punished."  Then  it  is 
clear,  that  neither  angels  nor  men  receive  their  punish- 
ment before  the  day  of  judgment,  for  rewards  and  punish- 
ments are  reserved  for  that  day. 

The  original  meaning  of  Tartarus  seems  to  have  been 
an  abyss  ;  the  thick  darkness  that  is  supposed  to  encircle 
the  universe — the  bounds  or  verge  of  the  material  sys- 
tem. The  Pagans  afterwards  perverted  this  w^ord,  and 
made  it  signify  a  place  beneath  the  earth,  where  the  Ti- 
tans, the  giants,  that  they  fabled  to  have  rebelled  against 
Jupiter,  were  confined ;  and  as  the  Pagans  originated 
the  idea  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  so  requiring  a 
place  to  put  these  fanciful  inventions,  these  immortal, 
tangible  intangibles,  that  could  see  and  be  seen,  and  yet 
be  invisible ;  could  feel  and  be  felt,  and  yet  be  too  et he- 
rial  for  cognizance  ;  they  put  them  in  Tartarus,  so  deep 
that  none  could  obtain  a  correct  knowledge  of  their  exis- 
tence. But  if  the  original  meaning  of  the  word  Tartarus 
be  in  perfect  harmony  with  revelation,  and  the  chief  of 
these  angels  be  called  **  The  prince  of  the  power  of  the 
air";  (Eph.  2:  2,)  although  the  word  has  been  used  in 
later  ages  by  Pagans,  in  their  fables,  to  designate  their 
receptacle  of  wicked  souls;  and  although  pFofessed 
Christians  have  adopted  these  fables,  and  inserted  them 
into  their  creeds ;  we  feel  no  inclination  to  attempt  to 
make  a  Pagan  of  Peter  to  save  these  precious  sectarian 
creeds!     We  assume,  therefore,  that  Peter  used  the 


CONCLUDING    REMARKS.  231 

word  Tartarus  to  express  the  region  of  the  atmosphere, 
or  abyss. 

CONCLUSION   RESPECTING  HELL. 

"We  have  now  examined  all  those  words  that  are  trans- 
lated hellj  and  all  others  that  bear  any  relation  to  the 
word  hell ;  and  the  result  is,  the  Bible  does  not  teach 
that  there  is  any  place  now  in  existence,  where  the  wick- 
ed dead  are  in  torments.  Nay,  that  neither  the  wicked 
nor  the  righteous  are  collected  in  one  common  receptacle, 
excepting  so  far  as  all  of  them  who  have  died,  are  in  the 
dominion  of  death — that  is,  in  sheol^  or  in  JiMdes — in  a 
STATE  of  entire  unconsciousness  ;  of  destitution  of  all  life, 
and  not  in  any  particular  place.  Further,  that  none  of 
the  terms  referring  to  the  future  punishment  of  the  wick- 
ed imply  that  the  wicked  will  be  torme/nted  for  ever  ;  but 
that  many  of  these  terms  do  most  emphatically  teach 
their  utter  extermination.  These  facts,  taken  with  the 
mass  of  direct,  positive,  and  plain  testimony,  that  the 
wicked  will  be  so  destroyed  as  to  be  entirely  put  out  of 
existence,  as  living  beings,  make  assurance  doubly  sure, 
that  the  universe  will  be  entirely  purified  of  all  wicked 
beings  ;  not  by  rendering  them  holy,  but  by  their  anni- 
hilation. Amen.  Kejoi'ce,  every  creature,  that  universal 
holiness  and  universal  happiness,  will  ultimately  prevail ! 
We  have  seen,  too,  that  as  the  word  hell  conveys  an  en- 
tirely diflferent  meaning  now,  from  that  which  it  formerly 
bore,  the  word  hell  should  be  entirely  blotted  out  of  any 
revision,  or  new  translation  of  the  Scriptures  ;  there  be- 
ing no  Hebrew,  nor  Greek  word,  that  corresponds  with 
it,  or  indeed  that  bears  the  slightest  aiBnity  to  it  in  its 
present  acceptation.  The  ideas  that  are  now  so  preva- 
lent respecting  hell,  have  been  necessitated  from  the  er- 
roneous belief,  that  has  increased  of  late  years,  of  the 
immortality  of  the  soul,  the  consciousness  of  the  dead, 
and  the  everlasting  misery  of  the  wicked  :  which  three 
errors  have  well  nigh  subverted  the  gospel  of  the  Son  of 
God.  The  words  fcom  which  hell  is  now  rendered,  should 
either  be  anghcized,  and  left  untranslated,  as  is  baptism  ; 
or  should  have  a  corresponding  English  synonym :  as 
sheol  and  hades^  death,  and  the  dominion  of  death ;  Ge- 
henna^ the  Valley  of  Hinnom  ;   Tartarus^  the  outer  re- 


232  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

gions,  or  regions  of  darkness  :  and  Ahussos^  an  abyss,  an 
abyss  of  waters,  or  a  profound  deep.  Nothing  can  be 
more  absurd  than  to  translate  all  these  words  by  the 
word  hell^  burdened  as  it  is,  with  its  present  theological 
definition. 

The  terms  applied  to  the  ultimate  destiny  of  the  wicked, 
are  utterly  at  variance  with  the  fable  of  "  eternal  misery ^"^ 
and  of  the  present  suffering  of  the  wicked  dead  in  any 
place  called  a  hell  of  fire  ;  as  these  terms  all  imply  the 
extinction  and  not  the  preservation  of  life  and  conscious- 
ness ;  and  no  honest  interpreter  of  the  Scriptures  will 
henceforth  attempt  to  reconcile  these  terms  with  eternal 
life  in  misery.  Consider  a  few  of  them  :  Death — second 
death — perish — utterly  perish — devour — destroy — cut  off 
— burn  up — consume — utterly  consume — destruction — 
perdition — corruption — they  shall  be  as  though  they 
had  not  been,  and  annihilation.  The  tire  that  will  con- 
sume the  wicked,  will  be  "  afire  that  consumeth  to  des- 
truction.^'' Job  31  :  12.  The  theologians  that  are  de- 
termed  to  sustain  their  tottering  sectarian  creeds,  must 
invent  some  other  words  more  pliant,  and  now  less  known 
than  the  terms  we  have  examined.  May  we  not  indulge 
the  hope  that  some  of  these  professed  teachers  for  the 
sake  of  honesty,  and  the  truth,  will  abandon  their  vain 
traditions  for  the  teachings  of  the  Bible  ?  Who  is  on 
the  Lord's  side  ?     Who  ?     Who  ? 


I 


233 


CHAPTEE  XII. 


ON    THE   PINAL   DESTINY   OF   THE   WICKED. 

"We  are  now  to  examine  what  the  Bible  teaches  rela- 
tive to  this  awful  subject.  We  have  already  proved  that 
man  is  a  unit — that  the  soul  of  man  comprehends  his 
whole  being — that  man  is  a  soul — that  man  has  no  soul, 
nor  spirit,  that  can  exist,  as  a  living  thing,  apart  from 
his  body — that  man  in  his  whole  nature  is  mortal ;  which 
of  course  implies  that  his  body  is  mortal,  his  soul  is  mor- 
tal— and  that  his  spirit,  being  merely  the  principle  of  life, 
is  neither  mortal,  nor  immortal — that  it  has  not  and  can- 
not have  conscious  existence  independently  of  the  or- 
ganized being  it  animated — that  the  compound  being, 
man,  becomes  entirely  unconscious  in  death,  "  so  that  a 
man  hath  no  pre-eminence  (in  death)  above  a  beast," 
"  they  all  have  one  (ruah)  breath  or  spirit,"  "  they  are 
all  made  of  the  dust,  and  all  turn  to  dust  again  :"  Ecc. 
3  :  19 — that  one  event  happeneth  to  all,  to  the  righteous 
and  the  wicked  ;  Ecc.  9 :  2.  Death  "  destroyeth  the 
perfect  and  the  wicked^"  and  "  no  man  can  dehver  his 
soul  from  the  hand  of  sheol,  or  death."  Ps.  89:  48, 
"  The  soul  (see  margin,)  of  the  hypocrite  dies  in  youth." 
Job  36  :  14.  Of  the  wicked,  says  the  Psalmist  49 :  19, 
margin,  "  His  soul  shall  go  to  the  generation  of  his  fa- 
thers, they  shall  never  see  light.  For  like  sheep  they 
are  laid  in  the  grave  ;  death  shall  feed  on  them."     14  v. 

As  we  have  already  proved  that  all  the  dead  are  un- 
conscious in  their  graves,  if  there  be  no  resurrection  they 
have  perished  like  brutes ;  they  have  been  already  blot- 
ted out  of  existence.  Not  a  question  could  have  arisen 
respecting  the  destiny  of  the  wicked,  had  it  not  been  as- 


234  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

Slimed  that  the  wicked  were  immortal,  and  consequently 
those  numerous  threatenings  that  speak  of  the  death, 
destruction,  consumption,  perishing,  &c.,  of  the  wicked, 
must,  to  be  consistent  with  the  notion  of  his  immortality, 
be  explained  away,  because  their  most  obvious  sense 
teach  that  the  wicked  will  be  utterly  exterminated. 

WILL    THE    WICKED    DEAD   BE    RAISED   TO    LIFE   AGAIN  ? 

As  all  the  dead  are  dependent  upon  a  resurrection  for 
all  future  hfe  and  consciousness,  so  if  the  wicked  do  not 
rise,  they  cannot  experience  any  more  punishment  than 
the  continuance  of  the  infliction  of  death  upon  them, 
which  would  then  be  in  their  case,  an  everlasting  punish- 
ment. It  is  quite  certain  that  the  resurrection  of  the 
wicked  is  not  clearly  taught  in  the  Old  Testament.  Dan. 
12  :  2,  as  it  stands  in  the  common  version,  seems  to  teach 
it,  but  a  better  translation  would  give  a  different  sense. 
"  And  many  of  those  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth 
shall  awake  :  these  to  everlasting  life,  those  to  reproach 
and  everlasting  abhorrence."  This  verse,  thus  interpre- 
ted, would  rather  seem  to  teach  the  ?zc>w  resurrection  of 
the  wicked.  Isa.  26  :  19-21,  has  been  supposed  to  teach 
it,  but  by  contrasting  the  19  v.  with  the  14  v.,  it  certain- 
ly only  teaches  the  resurrection  of  the  righteous.  Jer. 
31  :  15,  does  not  teach  it,  for  the  resurrection  there  taught 
is  a  joyful  resurrection.  None  of  the  threatenings  of  the 
O.  T.  teach  it.  We  think  all  the  arguments  drawn  only 
from  the  0.  T.  are  not  sufficient  to  say  that  they  teach 
a  resurrection  to  the  wicked,  though  that  glorious  event 
is  clearly  taught  of  the  righteous.  The  other  texts  that 
are  supposed  to  teach  the  resurrection  of  the  wicked  are 
the  following: — Eom.  14:  11,  12;  Acts  24:  15;  John 
5  :  28,  29  ;  2  Pet.  2  :  9-12  ;  Gal.  6  :  7,  8  ;  Job  4  :  8,  9  ; 
and  Pro.  22 :  8. 

THE  PENALTY  OF  THE  LAW  IS  DEATH. 

If  the  wicked  are  preserved  ahve  in  torments,  or  in 
any  sense,  then  this  penalty  will  never  be  inflicted.  Any 
penalty  that  comes  short  of  terminating  the  being  of  the 
wicked,  is  not  the  penalty  of  the  law. 

"  The  wages  of  sin  is  death,"  (Eom.  6 :  23,)  as  con- 


THE    WICKED    PERISH.  235 

trasted  with  endless  life.  "  The  8oul  that  sinneth  it  shall 
die  ;''''  Ez.  18  :  4,  20.  "  Sin,  when  it  is  finished,  bringeth 
forth  deatk'^  ;  Jam.  1:15.  Any  torment  or  punishment 
that  comes  short  of  terminating  the  very  being  of  the 
sufferer,  is  not  death,  and  therefore  is  not  the  penalty  of 
the  law%  which  law  has  not  reversed  but  confirmed  the 
first  judgment :  "  Dust  thou  art  and  unto  dust  shalt  thou 
return,"  for  sinners  are  to  be  "  ashes  under  the  feet  of 
the  righteous." 

THE    WICKED    MUST   PERISH. 

The  English  word  jjerish^  means  to  die  ;  to  wither ; 
to  decay ;  to  waste  away ;  to  be  destroyed  ;  to  come  to 
nothing ;  to  fail  entirely,  or  to  be  extirpated.  2  Kings 
9,  to  lose  life  ;  to  be  deprived  of  being.  The  Bible  al- 
w^ays  implies  death,  corruption,  destruction,  loss  of  being. 
2  Pet.  2  :  12,  "  And  shall  utterly  perish  in  their  own 
corruption." 

Such  is  the  meaning  of  the  Enghsh  word  pe?'ish,  and 
when  applied  to  living  beings,  in  no  case  can  it  be  made 
consistent  with  continued  preservation  in  life.  When 
appUed  to  inanimate  things,  it  impHes  their  total  destruc- 
tion. Mat.  9  :  17,  "  Else  the  bottles  break,  the  wine 
runneth  out,  and  the  bottles  (apolountai)  perish:  but 
they  put  new  wine  into  new  bottles,  and  both  are  pre- 
served.'''' Here  perish  stands  in  contrast  with  to  be  pre^ 
served  ;  and,  of  course,  if  a  thing  has  perished,  it  cannot 
possibly  mean  preserved.  So  when  the  same  term  is 
applied  to  men,  it  can  never  be  made  consistent  with 
preservation  in  any  shape  whatever.  So  it  never  means 
eternal  life  in  misery.  It  has  been  said  that  there  is  an 
exception  to  this  rule  in  2  Pet.  3:6,"  Whereby  the 
world  that  then  was,  being  overflowed  with  water  (apo- 
leto)  perishedy  But  if  they  look  to  the  very  next  verse 
they  will  perceive  that  world  which  *  perished'  stands 
opposed  to  "  the  heavens  and  the  earth  which  are  now," 
as  not  being  the  same  as  that  which  was  overflowed  with 
water,  and  will  continue  overflowed  till  the  new  heavens 
and  earth  are  made  to  appear.  For  Peter  says,  "Never- 
theless we,  according  to  his  promise^  look  for  new  hea- 
vens  and  a  new  earth,  wherein  dwelleth  righteousness." 
But  does  not  Peter  say,  "  The  earth  and  the  works  that 


236  :  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

are  therein  shall  be  burned  up."  If  the  reader  will  turn 
to  our  remarks  on  the  third  heavens,  he  will  perceive 
that  world  has  truly  perished,  of  which  Peter  spake,  and 
still  remains  overflow^ed — as  a  habitation  for  men,  it  does 
not  exist.  But  Peter  specially  refers  to  ''Hhe  world  of 
the  ungodly^'*''  who  "  perished."  Truly,  they  were  7iot 
preserved. 

When  applied  to  animals,  it  likewise  implies  death,  en- 
tire destruction.  Mat.  8  :  32,  "■  Behold  the  w^hole  herd 
of  swine  ran  violently  down  a  steep  place  into  the  sea, 
and  (apothnesko)  perished  in  the  w^aters."  And  it  never 
means  anything  different  when  apphed  to  men.  Rom. 
2  :  12,  "  As  many  therefore,  as  have  sinned  without  law, 
shall  also  {apolountai)  perish^  without  (being  judged  by)  ' 
law  :  and  as  many  as  have  sinned  under  law^,  shall  be 
judged  by  law."  Although  there  may  be  a  difference  in 
the  meaning  and  in  the  intensity  of  the  meaning,  of  the 
Hebrew  and  Greek  w^ords  translated  perish,  yet  w^e  shall 
see  that  the  very  mildest  of  them  import  the  destruction 
of  the  living  being;  and  but  for  the  resurrection  such 
destruction  w^ould  be  total.  And  w^hen  it  is  said,  Isa. 
57  :  1,  "  The  righteous  perisheth  ;  and  no  man  layeth  it 
to  heart";  and  Ecc.  7:  15,  "There  is  a  just  man  that 
perisheth  in  his  righteousness" ;  it  implies  a  total  depri- 
vation of  life;  and  Paul  tells  us,  1  Cor.  15  :  16-18,  '*If 
the  dead  rise  not.. ..then  they  also  who  have  fallen  asleep 
in  Christ  have  (apolonto)  perished  "/  are  for  ever  depri- 
ved of  all  being.  While  this  proves  that  the  word  perish 
does  imply  destruction  of  being,  it  being  thus  applied  to 
the  righteous,  proves  likewise  that  perish  does  not  mean 
preservation  of  life  in  hell ;  for  to  Ecc.  7  :  15,  it  is  added, 
"  And  there  is  a  wicked  man  that  prolongeth  his  life  in 
his  wickedness,"  which  is  opposed  to  the  righteous  w^hoby 
losing  his  life,  '•'- perisheth?'^  John  10:  28,  "  I  give  unto 
(my  sheep)  eternal  life ;  and  they  shall  (pie  ajiohntai  eis 
ton  aiona)  not  perish  in  the  age."  Here  again  to  perish 
is  opposed  to  eternal  life,  consequently  it  cannot  mean 
eternal  life  in  torments.  Moreover  Christ  intimates  that 
his  sheep  do  perish  in  death  till  the  introduction  of  the 
age  or  reign  of  Christ  on  earth,  on  the  throne  of  his  fa- 
ther David. 

John  3  :  15,  16,  "  That  whosoever  believeth   in   him 
should  not  (apoletai)  perish,  but  have  eternal  life."     But 


THE    WICKED    PERISH.  M^     2§lf  ' 

if  the  wicked  have  eternal  life  in   misery,  tirev'k)©  will 

never  perish,  and  there  is  no  contrast.  ^^1^*  •      7  i"- i'^'S  '^  ' 

Acts  8  :  20,  "  But  Peter  said  unto  him,  ThyS^te^tg^T  '^  ^^- 
{apoleian)  perish  with  thee,  because  thou  hast  thoughU 
that  the  gift  of  God  may  be  purchased  with  money." 
Here  it  is  intimated  that  money  and  the  wicked  will 
perish  ahke.  If  money  can  Uve  and  endure  eternal 
misery,  the  language  of  Peter  might  have  been  twisted 
so  as  to  read  that  Simon  should  not  literally  perish — ^but 
that  Simon  and  his  money  should  alike  live  and  suffer 
together  ^'eternal  torments"  !  ! 

We  give  twenty  other  texts  where  the  reader  may 
look  for  the  meaning  of  the  word  perish.  Num.  24  :  20, 
24  ;  Deut.  8  :  19  ;  Jud.  5:31;  Job  4  :  9,  20  ;  20 :  7  ;  Ps. 
2:  12;  9:  3;  10  :  16  ;  37 :  20  ;  68  :  2;  83  :  17  ;  112: 
10;  Is.  41  :  11  ;  Lu.  13:5;  Acts  13  :  41 ;  1  Cor.  1  :  18; 
8:11;   15:  18;  and  2  Pet.  2:  12. 

We  shall  give  a  few  quotations  explanatory  of  the 
original  words  translated  perish.  SopJwh  means  to  come 
to  an  end. 

1  Sam.  26 :  9,  David  said  to  Saul,  "  Destroy  him  not 
....The  Lord  shall  smite  him ;  or  his  day  shall  come  to 
die  ;  or  he  shall  descend  into  battle  and  (soplioh)  come  to 
an  endy  But  if  the  '^  immortal  soul"  of  Saul  lives,  then 
certainly  he  has  neither  perished  nor  come  to  an  end.  So 
in  1  Sam.  27  :  1. 

Another  word  translated  perish  is  gova^  to  waste 
away,  to  decay.  Josh.  22 :  20,  And  Achan  ("  gova^) 
wasted  away  not  alone  in  his  iniquity."  Job  34  :  14,  "If 
God  set  his  heart  upon  man,  if  he  gather  unto  himself 
his  ruah^  spirit,  and  his  nesme^  breath  ;  all  flesh  shall 
{gova^  decay  together,  and  man  shall  turn  again  unto 
dust."  If  the  man  decays  and  turns  to  dust  again,  what 
is  left  but  the  spirit  of  the  breath  of  Hves  which  is  not  a 
conscious  thing,  and  which  God  has  gathered  into  the 
great  reservoir  of  all  animal  hfe  ?  Job  36  :  12,  "  But  if 
they  obey  not,  they  shall  (gova)  waste  away  by  the  sword, 
and  they  shall  die  without  knowledge." 

A  word  implying  the  most  complete  destruction, 
translated  perish ,  is  shomad^  to  annihilate.  Ps.  83  :  9, 
10,  "  Do  unto  them  as  unto....Jabin,  at  the  brook  Kis- 
hon  :  who  (shomad)  were  annihilated  at  Endor :  they 
became  as  dung  for  the  earth."     As  living  beings,  they 


233  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

were  put  out  of  existence.  Such  language  could  not  ap- 
ply to  such  as  had  *  immortal  souls' ;  but  as  it  does  ap- 
ply to  those  that  were  annihilated  at  Endor,  it  proves 
that  they  had  no  such  Pagan  appendages. 

Other  strong  words  translated  perish,  are  adai  ouvaid^ 
utter  destruction.  Num.  24  :  19,  20,  "  Out  of  Jacob 
shall  come  he  (Christ)  that  shall  have  dominion."  And 
w^hen  Balaam  "  looked  on  Amalek,  he  took  up  his  para- 
ble, and  said,  Amalek  was  the  first  of  the  nations,  but 
his  latter  end  shall  be  {adai  ouvaid)  utter  destruction  for 
ever."  23  v,  *'  And  he  took  up  his  parable,  and  said, 
Alas,  who  shall  live  when  God  doeth  this  !  And  ships 
shall  come  from  Chittim,  and  shall  afflict  Asshur,  and 
shall  afflict  Eber,  and  he  also  shall  be  [adai  ouvaid)  utter 
destruction  f 07'  every  As  this  is  a  prophecy  to  take 
place  under  the  judicial  reign  of  Christ,  it  must  imply 
the  final  disposition  of  these  nations — they  will  be  ut- 
terly exterminated.  Thus  we  see  that  many  of  the  He- 
brew w^ords  are  much  more  forcible  than  the  English 
word  perish. 

We  turn  to  the  N.  T.  Kataphtheiro,  Phtheiro 
means  to  corrupt,  and  kata  renders  the  word  more  in- 
tensive. 2  Pet.  2:12,  ''  But  these  as  natural  brute 
beasts,  made  to  be  taken  and  destroyed,  speak  evil  of 
the  things  that  they  understand  not ;  and  shall  utterly 
perish  in  their  own  corruption."  This  is  a  terrible  de- 
nunciation against  false  teachers ;  like  the  beasts  made 
for  no  other  purpose  but  to  corrupt ;  these  like  them 
shall  corrupt  in  the  utter  corruption  of  their  own  nature. 
The  manner  of  their  perishing  is  hke  that  of  beasts ;  as 
beasts  were  not  made  for  eternal  torments  but  for 
slaughter  and  corruption,  so  are  these.  The  simple 
form  of  the  word  is  applied  to  beasts,  and  both  the  sim- 
ple and  intensive  to  these  men. 

Apolonto^  destroyed.  Jude  11  v,  ^'  Wo  is  to  them  ; 
for  they  have  gone  in  the  way  of  Cain,  and  have  run  far 
in  the  error  of  Balaam's  hire,  and  have  (apulonto)  perish- 
ed in  the  rebellion  of  Korah."  We  refer  farther  to  2 
Cor.  2:15,  16;  Mat.  18:14;  Luke  13:3;  Acts  8 : 
20;  Ps.  73:29;  92:9;  Prov.  12:9;  Deut.  8:19; 
Judges  5:31;  Job  4  :  9,  20 ;  20  :  7 ;  Ps.  2  :  12 ;  9  :  3  ; 
10:16;  37:20;  68:2;  83:1;  112:10;  Isa.  41  :  11  ; 
Acts   13:41;    1  Cor.    1:18;    8:11;    15:   18.      Thes(3 


THE   WICKED    SHALI,   BE   DESTROYED.  239 

thirty-two  texts  declare  that  the  wicked  shall  perish ; 
and  perish  always  implies  death. 

THE  WJCKED  SHALL  BE  DESTROYED 

To  destroy  means  to  demolish,  to  ruin  ;  to  annihilate  ; 
to  bring  to  nought ;  to  kill ;  to  extirpate ;  to  put  an  end 
to.  And  the  Bible  meaning  is  even  more  intensive. 
The  same  words  are  sometimes  translated  destroy  or 
perish.  But  the  meaning  will  be  obvious  from  the  pas- 
sages we  shall  quote.  There  are  thirty- eight  different 
Hebrew  words  rendered  destroy.  One  of  the  chief  of 
these  is  tsoynath,  to  annihilate. 

2  Sam.  22  :  41 ,  "  Thou  hast  also  given  me  the  necks  of 
mine  enemies,  that  I  might  (tsamath)  annihilate  those 
that  hate  me."  This  verse  is  again  repealed,  Ps.  18  :  40. 
Ps.  69 :  4,  ^'  They  that  would  (tsomath)  annihilate  me, 
being  mine  enemies  wrongfully,  are  mighty."  Ps.  101  : 
8,  *'  I  will  earlv  tsomath  {annihilate)  all  the  wicked  of 
the  land."  Ps.  73  :  27,  "  For,  lo,  they  that  are  far  from 
thee  shall  perish  :  thou  hast  {tsomath)  annihilated  all 
them  that  go  a  whoring  from  thee."  There  is  no  stronger 
word  that  we  know  of  to  describe  the  utter  destruction 
of  the  being  of  the  wicked. 

Prov.  15 :  25,  "  The  Lord  will  {nosakh,)  extirpate  the 
house  (or  family)  of  the  proud."  Ps.  52 :  5,  "  God  shall 
likewise  destroy  thee  for  ever ;  he  shall  take  thee  away, 
and  pluck  thee  out  of  thy  dwelling  place,  and  root  thee 
out  of  the  land  of  the  living^  Selah."  Then  a  destroyed 
person  cannot  be  a  living  one. 

From  these  examples  there  can  be  no  difficulty  in  un- 
derstanding the  Bible  definition  of  destroy  and  destruc- 
tion :  they  imply  the  deprivatioa  of  life  and  being.  Mat. 
2  :  13,  "  For  Herod  will  seek  the  young  child  to  destroy 
him."  Ps.  92 :  7,  "  When  the  wicked  spring  as  the 
grass,  and  when  all  the  workers  of  iniquity  do  flourish  ; 
it  is  that  they  shall  be  destroyed  for  ever^  Ps.  145  :  20, 
"  The  Lord  preserveth  ail  them  that  love  him  :  but  all 
the  wicked  will  he  destroy."  Destruction,  when  ap- 
plied to  men,  always  means  the  deprivation  of  life,  and  is 
the  very  opposite  of  preservation  in  life.  The  difference 
of  meaning  when  applied  to  men  generally,  including  the 
righteous  and  the  wicked  is,  the  destruction  does  not 


240  BIBLE   VS.  TRADITION. 

prevent  a  resurrection  to  life  by  Almighty  power  ;  but 
when  apphed  to  the  wicked,  as  such,  it  always  implies 
thai  they  are  or  shall  continue  destroyed,  they  are  "  de 
stroyed  for  ever."  Prov.  13  :  13,  *'  Whoso  despiseththe 
word  shall  be  destroyed.'^  Prov.  29  :  1,  ^'  He  that,  being 
often  reproved,  hardeneth  his  neck,  shall  suddenly  be 
destroyed,  and  that  without  remedy."  The  remedy  for 
the  death  and  destruction  of  the  righteous  is  found  in  the 
resurrection,  making  the  dominion  of  death  but  tempo- 
rary. Prov.  6 :  32,  ^'  Whoso  committeth  adultery....de- 
stroyeth  his  own  soul"  ^  his  own  conscious  existence.  A 
soul  cannot  exist  and  remain  destroyed  at  the  same  time. 
Mat.  10  :  28,  "  Fear  liim  who  is  able  to  destroy  both  soul 
and  body  (both  life  and  being,)  in  Gehenna."  Then  a 
destroyed  soul,  or  person,  cannot  be  living  in  any  sense. 
Lev.  23  :  28,  "  And  ye  shall  do  no  work  in  that  same  day; 
^***  whatsoever  soul  it  be  that  doeth  any  work  in  that 
same  day,  the  same  soul  will  I  destroy  from  among  the 
people."  Mark,  God  is  able  to  destroy  a  soul,  or  being, 
and  he  declares  that  he  will  destroy  such  as  continue  to 
offend  him.  If  a  soul  is  kept  alive  eternally  in  torments 
it  is  not  destroyed  in  any  sense.  This  is  so  obvious  that 
those  who  believe  in  eternal  torments  say  it  is  something 
else  that  is  destroyed,  such  as  glory  and  happiness.  But 
this  is  a  denial  of  the  plain  letter  of  Scripture.  James 
(4:  12,)  sa3^s,  ''  There  is  one  Lawgiver,  who  is  able  to 
save  and  destroy."  If  it  be  said  that  God's  being  able 
to  destroy  both  life  and  being  does  not  prove  that  he  will 
do  it,  then  neither  does  our  quotation  prove  that  God 
will  either  save  or  destroy.  We  affirm  that  God  cannot 
destroy  a  person  without  destroying  his  soul,  his  con- 
scious being  ;  the  contrary  is  a  manifest  contradiction. 
1  Cor.  3  :  17,  "  If  any  man  defile  the  temple  of  God,  him 
shall  God  destroy."  Eev.  11 :  18,  ^'  Thy  wrath  is  come, 
and  the  time  of  the  dead,  that  they  should  be  judged, 
and  that  thou  shouldest.... destroy  them  which  destroy 
the  earth." 

See  also  Deut.  7:10;  Job  34  :  25  ;  Ps'  5  :  6,  10 ;  101 : 
8;  Prov.  1:32;  11:3;  13:20;  Isa.  13:9;  42:14; 
Ps.  143 :  12  ;  144  :  6  ;  Mat.  21  :  13  ;  Mark  12:9:  Luke 
20  :  16.  Here  are  thirty  texts  that  state  that  all  the 
wicked  will  God  destroy,  and  not  the  least  hint  in  any 
place,  that  they  shall  be  preserved  alive  in  endless  misery. 


DESTRUCTEON  SHALL  COME   UPON   THE  WICKED.  241 

Nay,  tliB  Scriptures  say,  Job  36:  6,  God  "  preserveth 
»ot  the  life  of  tho  wicked."  Acts  3  :  20,  "  For  Moses 
truly  said  unto  the  fathers,  A  pix)phet  «hall  th-e  Lord 
your  God  raise  up  lanto  you  of  your  brethren,  like  un- 
to me ;  him  shall  y-e  hear  in  all  things  whatsoever  he 
shall  say  unto  you.  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that  every 
{psuche)  soul,  which  will  not  hear  that  prophet,  {exolo- 
threuthesetai  ek  ton  laou)  shall  be  utterly  exterminated 
out  of,  or  out  from  among,  the  people,"  Reader,  examine 
the  language,  and  believe  the  *^  souW^  that  reject  Christ 
will  be  "  utterly  extermin^at^d."  If  these  exceedingly 
emphatic  expressions  do  not  teach  the  utter  annihilation 
of  the  being  of  the  wicked ;  we  ask,  How  can  any  lan- 
.^uage  possibly  teach  it  I 

a>tE:sTRiK;TioN  shall  <x)ME  upon  the  wicked. 

Destruction,  though  we  give  it  a  separate  place,  signi- 
€es  the  a<5t  of  destroying,  and  has  the  same  general  mean- 
ing as  destroy:;  but  Webster  gives  'eternal  death,'  as 
one  of  its  meanings.  Thoiigb  tbe  w^ords  eternal  death, 
do  not  occur  in  the  Scriptures,  yet  death,  not  to  be  fol- 
lowed by  a  resurrection,  is  eternal  death  ;  and  the  simple 
term  expresses  ail  that  the  compound  term  does.  The 
persons  exposed  thei^unto  become  extinct  and  continue 
icxtinct.  The  idea  in  the  Scriptures  is  expressed  nega- 
tively, ^'  They  shall  not  see  life."  But  the  JBible  will  ex- 
plain the  term  dostruction,  2  Chron.  22:  4,  Ahaziah 
■^^  did  evil  in  th«  sigbt  of  th^  Lord  like  the  house  of  Ahab  \ 
for  they  were  his  counsellors,  after  tho  death  of  his  fa- 
ther, to  hi«  destruction^^  ;  and  the  9  v.  records  the  man- 
ner of  his  destruction,  he  was  slain  by  Jehu.  So  Est.  8 : 
€,  "  For  how  can  I  -endTire  to  see  the  destruction  of  my 
kindred."  The  decree  had  gone  forth  ^'  to  destroy,  to 
kill,  and  to  cause  to  perish  ;^'  and  this  Esther  calls  de- 
struction. Job  says,  31 :  23,  ^'  Destruction  from  God  was 
^  terror  to  me."  Observe,  Job  does  not  say  that  endless 
misery  ^was  a  terror  to  bim,  but  simply  destruction. — 
Then  the  fear  of  the  destruction  of  being  was  the  restraint 
in  those  days.  Ps.  73 :  17-19^  The  Psalmist  says  of  the 
wicked,  "  I  went  into  the  sanctuary  of  God ;  then  under- 
stood I  their  end  ;  (the  last  of  them).  Surely  thou  didst 
«et  them  in  slippery  places :  thou  castest  them  down  into 


242  BIBLE  VS,  TRADITIOBl. 

destruction.  They  are  utterly  consumed  with  terrorsv^ 
Destruction  puts  an  end  to  them- ;  and  such  was  the  des 
truction  that  was  a  terror  to  Job.  Pro,  21 :  15,  "  Destruc- 
tion shall  be  to  the  workers  of  iniquity."  Isa.  1  :  28, 
*'  And  the  destruction  of  the  transgressors  and  of  the 
sinners  shall  be  together,  and  they  that  forsake  the  Lord 
&hall  be  consumed.'^  Isa.  10:  25,  God  speaking  to  hi? 
people  of  the  Assyrians,,  says,  "  For  yet  a  very  little 
while,  and  the  indignation  shall  cease,  and  mine  anger  m 
their  destruction."  The  anger  of  God  ceases  when  the 
wicked  are  destroyed,  for  there  is  nothing  left  of  them  to 
be  angry  with.  The  prophet  prays  for  those  that  ridi- 
culed the  word  of  the  Lord,  that  God  woald  "  bring  up- 
on them  the  day  of  evil,  and  destroy  them  with  a  double 
destruction^  Jer.  17  :  18.  "  Destruction  unto  them!  be 
cause  they  have  transgressed  against  me."  Hos.  7  :  13, 
Such  is  the  general  tenor  of  the  O.  T. 

The  N.  T.  likewise  testifies  that  the  destruction  of  the 
wicked  puts  an  end  to  their  existence.  Mat.  7:  13,, 
*'  Wide  is  the  gate,  and  broad  is  the  way,  that  leadeth 
to  destruction,  and  many  there  be  which  go  in  thereat."" 
Phil.  3  :  19„ "  They  are  the  er^mies  of  the  cross  of  Christ : 
whose  end  is  destruction.'^  But  eternal  torments  caB 
have  no  end  and  no  destruction.  I  Pet.  2:1,  "There 
shall  be  false  teachers  among  you,  who..,.bring  upon 
themselves  swift  destruction."  1  These.  5  :  3,. "  The  day 
of  the  Lord  so  comet  h  as  a  thief  in  the  night.  For  when 
they  shall  say,  Peace  and  safety ;  then  sudden  destruc- 
tion cometh  upon  them."  2  Thess.  1  : 7-9,  God  shall 
recompense  "  to  you  who  are  troubled,  rest  with  us,, 
when  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from  heav^i  with 
his  mighty  angels,  in  flaming  fire,  taking  vengeance  on 
them  that  know  not  God,  and  that  obey  not  the  gospe! 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ :  who  shall  be  punished  with 
everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord  and 
from  the  glory  of  his  power. '^  It  might  be  asked,  Can 
the  wicked  exist  when  destroyed,  and  exist  too  where 
God  has  neither  presence  nor  power  ?  See  also  Deut. 
32:24;  Job  18:  12;  Ps.  2:9;  35:8;^  37:9,22,38; 
94:23:  1Q1:5,8;  143:12;  Pro.  1:26,27;  2:22,' 
10:14,29;  13:3;  Isa.  13:6,  7;  59:  7  ;  Jer.  17:  15  ,' 
Eom.  3:16;  9  :  22  ;  11  :  22  ;  I  Tim.  6 :  9.  Here  are 
forty  texts  that  say  the  wicked  will  be  destroyed ;  and 


THE   WICKED   WULL    BE    DEVOURED.  243 

intimating,  with  a  destruction  that  will  bring  their  exis- 
tence to  an  end.  Alas  !  for  the  unhappy  critic  that  shall 
endeavor  to  make  these  texts  compatible  with  the  ever- 
lasting conscious  existence  of  the  wicked  I 

THE  WICKED  WILL  BE  DEVOURED. 

The  word  devour,  to  eat  up,  when  applied  to  the 
wicked,  imphes  their  total  consumption  and  annihilation. 
Lev.  10:  2,  "There  went  out  fire  from  the  Lord,  and 
devoured  them,  and  they  died  before  the  Lord."  Jer. 
2  :  30,  "  Your  own  sword  hath  devoured  your  prophets, 
like  a  destroying  lion."  Devour  here  imphes  death,  and 
destruction  by  fire  or  sword.  Ps.  21  :  8,  9,  "  Thine  hand 
shall  find  out  all  thine  enemies.  Thou  shalt  make  them 
as  a  fiery  oven  in  the  time  of  thine  anger :  the  Lord  shall 
swallow  them  up  in  his  wrath,  and  the  fire  shall  devour 
them."  Isa.  10:  16,  "Therefore  shall  the  Lord,  the 
Lord  of  hosts,  send  among  his  fat  ones  leanness ;  and 
under  his  glory  he  shall  kindle  a  burning  like  the  burning 
of  a  fire.  And  the  light  of  Israel  shall  be  for  a  fire,  and 
his  Holy  One  for  aflame :  and  it  shall  burn  and  devour 
his  thorns  and  his  briers  (the  wicked)  in  one  day  ;  and 
shall  consume  the  glory  of  his  forest,  and  of  his  fruitful 
field,  both  soul  and  body^  (life  and  being,)  and  they  shall 
be  as  when  a  standard  bearer  {koloh)  is  consumed." 
Isa.  26 :  11,  "  Yea  the  fire  of  thine  enemies  shall  devour 
them."  Isa.  33:  11,  "Ye  shall  conceive  chaff,  ye  shall 
bring  forth  stubble  :  yuur  breath  as  fire  shall  devour  you. 
And  the  people  shall  be  as  the  burnings  of  lime ;  as 
thorns  cut  up  shall  they  be  burned  in  the  fire."  14  v, 
"  The  sinners  in  Zion  are  afraid ;  fearfulness  hath  sur- 
prised the  hypocrites.  Who  among .  us  shall  dwell  (or 
live)  with  the  devouring  fire?  Who  among  us  shall 
dwell  (or  live)  with  everlasting  burnings  ?"  Says  Paul, 
"  How  shall  we  escape,  if  we  neglect  so  great  salvation  ?" 
All  these  questions  imply  the  impossibility  of  escape,  for 
it  is  impossible  for  the  sinner  to  escape  punishment ;  and 
equally  impossible  for  him  to  dwell  (or  live)  in  a  devour- 
ing or  everlasting  fire  without  being  consumed.  Can  a 
devouring  fire  fail  to  devour  its  fuel  ?  If  it  devours,  it 
must  consume  the  wicked.  Everlasting,  in  this  place, 
means  lasting  till  the  fuel  be  entirely  consumed.     Heb. 


244  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

10  :  27,  There  remaineth  to  the  wicked,  "  A  certain  fear- 
ful looking  for  of  judgment  and  fiery  indignation,  which 
shall  devour  the  adversaries."  Nahum  1:8,"  Darkness 
shall  pursue  his  enemies.  What  do  ye  imagine  against 
the  Lord  ?  he  will  make  an  utter  end :  affliction  shall 
not  rise  up  a  second  time.  For  while  they  be  folden  to- 
gether as  thorns,  and  while  they  are  drunken  as  drunk- 
ards, they  shall  be  devoured  as  stubble  fully  dry."  Eev. 
20  :  9,  "  A  fire  came  down  from  God  out  of  heaven  and 
devoured  them."  See  also  Psa  50  :  9  ;  76  :  7  ;  Jer.  5  : 
14.  Here  are  eleven  times  that  the  word  devour  is  ap- 
plied to  the  end  of  the  wicked.  After  sinners  are  de- 
voured, we  see  not  how  even  God  himself  could  inflict 
more  punishment  upon  them  without  raising  them  again 
to  life  ;  but  such  sure  work  will  God  make  with  sinners 
that  it  will  not  be  necessary  to  afflict  them  a  second 
time. 

THE  WICKED  WILL  BE  CONSUMED. 

Consume,  in  its  apphcation  to  the  wicked,  implies  to 
waste  away ;  to  cause  to  pass  away ;  to  bring  to  utter 
ruin  ;  to  exterminate  ;  to  burn  up.  But  we  will  see  its 
Bible  exposition.  In  the  O.  T.  it  is  koloh^  to  consume, 
finish,  come  to  an  end.  Ex.  15  :  7,  "  Thou  sentest  forth 
thy  wrath,  which  consumed  them  as  stubble."  Here 
Pharaoh  and  his  host  were  consumed  by  being  drowned 
in  the  sea.  Num.  17:  13,  "Whoso  cometh**near**the 
tabernacle.... shall  die  :  shall  be  consumed  with  dying." 
Ps.  71  :  13,  "  Let  them  be  confounded  and  consumed 
that  are  adversaries  to  my  soul."  Isa.  1  :  28,  "  The  de- 
struction of  the  transgressors  and  of  the  sinners  shall  be 
together,  and  they  that  forsake  the  Lord  shall  be  con- 
sumed." Isa.  5  :  24,  "  As  the  fire  devoureth  the  stubble, 
and  the  flame  consumeth  the  chaff",  so  their  root  shall  be 
as  rottenness,  and  their  blossom  shall  go  up  as  dust ; 
because  they  have  cast  away  the  law  of  the  Lord." 
Zep.  1  :  2,  "  I  will  utterly  consume  all  things  from  off 
the  land,  saith  the  Lord,  I  will  consum^e  man  and  beast ; 
I  will  consume  the  fowls  of  the  heaven,  and  the  fishes  of 
the  sea,  and  the  stumbhng-blocks  with  the  wicked  ;  and 
I  will  cut  off*  man  from  off  the  land,  saith  the  Lord." 
Isa.  47 :  14,  "  Behold  they  (the  astrologers,)  shall  be  as 


THE   WICKED    WILL    BE    BURNEL    WITH   FIRE.  245 

stubble ;  the  fire  shall  burn  them  ;  tney  shall  not  deliver 
their  souls  (original  and  margin,)  from  the  power  of  the 
flame."  Their  souls  then  being  under  the  power  of  the 
flame,  will  surely  be  consumed.  But  their  souls,  means 
themselves.  Granted.  They  will  be  utterly  consumed 
soul  and  being.  See  also,  Deut.  4  :  24  ;  1  Sam.  22 :  25  : 
Job  4  :  8,  9;  15 :  34  ;  20  :  26  ;  Ps.  75  :  3  ;  Isa.  10  :  22, 23 
16  :  4  ;  28  :  22  ;  29  :  20  ;  50  :  9. 

Here  are  twenty  times  that  the  Bible  plainly  declares 
the  wicked  shall  be  consumed  in  destruction.  This  can- 
not be  made  compatible  with  continued  existence  in  mis- 
ery. But  alas,  alas,  it  has  been  prophecied  that  in  the 
last  days,  those  who  have  the  form  of  godliness,  shall 
turn  from  the  truth  unto  fables,  and  will  not  endure 
sound  doctrine,  but  having  itching  ears,  they  will  heap 
to  themselves  such  teachers  as  will  twist  the  Bible  into 
a  conformity  with  their  contradictory  creeds.  See  2  Tim. 
c.  3  and  4. 

THE    WICKED   WILL    BE    BURNED    WITH   FIRE. 

That  literal  fire  will  be  used  as  an  instrument  in  the 
punishment  of  the  wicked  in  the  judgment  to  take  place 
when  Christ  shall  return  from  heaven,  is  a  plain  matter 
of  record  ;  and  though  the  language  of  John  in  describ- 
ing the  destruction  of  the  wicked,  at  the  end  of  the  one 
thousand  years,  is  highly  figurative  and  symbolical,  yet 
we  may  infer  that  literal  fire  will  then  be  used ;  perhaps 
the  same  fire  that  will  dissolve  the  elements  of  the  hea- 
vens, or  the  atmospheres,  prior  to  the  everlasting  renova- 
tion of  the  heavens  and  the  earth.  Indeed  in  2  Pet.  3  : 
7-13,  the  destruction  of  the  wicked,  and  the  destruction 
of  the  present  arrangement  that  exists  in  the  heavens,  or 
atmospheres,  and  the  earth,  are  coupled  together  as 
though  the  same  fire  would  be  used  in  the  accompHsh- 
ment  of  both.  "  But  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  which 
are  now,  by  the  same  word  are  kept  in  store,  reserved 
unto  fire  against  the  day  of  judgment  and  perdition  of 
ungodly  men."  The  similitudes  and  examples  of  the  des- 
truction of  the  wicked  mostly  refer  to  the  instrumentality 
of  fire.  Mat.  13  :  30,  "  Let  both  (the  tares  and  the  wheat,) 
grow  together  until  the  harvest ;  andin  the  time  of  harvest, 
I  will  say  to  the  reapers,  First  gather  the  tares,  and  make 


246  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

them  into  bundles  for  burning ;  then  carry  the  wheat 
into  my  barn." 

In  the  exposition  of  this  parable,  Christ  declared  that 
"  The  field  is  the  world  :  the  gpod  seed  are  the  sons  of 
the  kingdom  ;  and  the  tares  are  the  sons  of  the  evil  one. 
The  enemy  who  sowed  them  is  the  devil :  the  harvest  is 
the  conclusion  of  this  age;  and  the  reapers  are  the  an- 
gels. As,  therefore,  the  tares  are  gathered  and  burned, 
so  shall  it  be  at  the  conclusion  of  this  age.  The  Son  of 
man  will  send  his  angels,  who  shall  gather  out  of  his 
kingdom  all  seducers  and  iniquitous  persons,  and  throw 
them  into  the  burning  furnace  :  weeping  and  gnashing  of 
teeth  shall  be  there."  As  the  tares  must  be  burned  to 
ashes,  so  must  the  sinners  be  burned  to  ashes  :  and  as 
there  would  be  no  tares  left  after  being  subjected  to  the 
continued  action  of  fire  :  so  there  will  be  no  sinners  left ; 
they  will  be  totally  destroyed  in  like  manner. 

The  cities  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrha  are  set  forth  as 
an  example,  or  pattern,  of  the  manner  in  which  the  wick- 
ed will  be  burned  or  destroyed.  Gen.  19 :  24,  "  Then 
the  Lord  rained  upon  Sodom  and  upon  Gomorrha  brim- 
stone and  fire  out  of  heaven.'^''  Examine  2  Pet.  2  :  6,  and 
Jude  6,  7,  '^  Also  the  angels  who  kept  not  their  own 
office.... he  hath  reserved  in  everlasting  chains,  under 
darkness,  unto  the  judgment  of  the  great  day.  As  So- 
dom and  Gomorrha,.... are  set  forth  an  example,  having 
undergone  the  punishment  of  an  eternal  fire.  In  like 
manner,  indeed,  these  also  shall  be  punished."  Mark, 
the  cities  of  the  plain,  have  already  suffered  the  punish- 
ment of  "  eternal  fire"  ;  it  has  consumed  them  and  their 
inhabitants  ;  and  this  is  the  pattern  given  of  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  wicked.  As  nothing  that  is  concealed  can  be 
an  example  to  us,  so  the  example  must  consist  in  their 
outward,  visible,  total  destruction.  As  the  Sodomites 
were  punished  judicially,  the  0.  T.  Scriptures  afford  us 
no  proof  that  they  will  ever  have  a  resurrection.  Rom. 
2  :  12,  "  As  many,  therefore,  as  have  sinned  without  law, 
shall  also  perish  without  being  judged  by  law." 

2  Sam.  23  :  6,  7,  "  But  the  sons  of  Behal  (the  worth- 
less,)  shall  be  all  of  them  as  thorns  thrust  away.... and 
they  shall  be  utterly  burned  with  fire  in  the  same  place." 
Isa.  23  :  11,  12,  "  Ye  shall  conceive  chaff,  ye  shall  bring 
forth  stubble  :  your  breath,  as  fire,  shall  devour  you,  and 


THE   WICKED   WILL   BE   BURNED   WITH   FIRE.  247 

fhe  people  shall  be  as  the  burnings  of  lime  :  as  thorns 
cut  up  shall  they  be  burned  in  the  fire."  See  also  Psa, 
11:6;  83:14,15;  140:  It);  Isa,  24:6;  66:15,16; 
Mat.  7  :  19  ;  John  15:6.  Here  are  fourteen  texts  that 
plainly  declare  that  the  wjcted  shall  be  burned  with  fire. 
The  siraihtudes  that  are  used,  such  as  thorns,  briers, 
tares,  stubble,  trees,  and  chaff,  being  all  combustible  ar- 
ticles, and  when  representing  the  wicked,  are  consumed 
by  fire,  and  leave  nothing  but  ashjes,  so  will  the  wicked 
ultimately  be;  "^^  Y-e  (the  righteous)  shall  tread  down  the 
wicked ;  for  they  shall  be  cishes  under  the  soles  of  your 
feet  in  the  day  that  I  shall  do  this ;  saith  the  Lord  of 
hosts."  These  figures  can  never  be  reconciled  with  the 
•eternal  conscioias  existence  of  the  wicked.  If  such  a  doc- 
trine were  true^  no  figures  could  be  more  inappropriate 
to  express  it  ;  but  as  the  Scriptures  uniformly  testify  of 
the  total  destruction  of  the  wholebeing  of  the  wicked,  so  no 
figures  could  be  more  appropriately  chosen  to  represent 
the  extermination  of  their  entire  being.  To  afiirmthat  the 
wicked  will  live  for  evei'  in  misery,  when  God  says  they 
shall  be  burned  up  like  stubble  fully  dry,  is  plainly  to 
contradict  God,  We  have  been  taught  that  G-od  means 
what  he  says,  and  says  what  he  means ;  and  God  says, 
*^'  In  that  day  when  I  make  up  my  jewels.. ..then  shall  ye 
discern  between  the  righteous  and  the  wicked.... For,  be- 
hold the  day  cometh  that  shall  burn  as  an  oven ;  and  all 
the  proud,  yea,  and  all  that  do  wickedly,  shall  be  stubble  : 
and  the  day  that  eometh  shall  burn  them  up,  saith  the  Lord 
of  hosts,  that  it  shall  leave  them  neither  root  nor  branch,... 
And  ye  shall  tread  down  the  wicked ;  for  they  shall  be 
ashes  under  the  soles  of  your  feet  in  the  day  that  I  shall  do 
this,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts.^  Mai.  4  This  declaration  of 
the  Almighty  we  are  bound  to  believe.  But  cavilerBhave 
tried  to  weaken  the  effect  of  this  passage,  by  stating  that 
the  word  '  up'  is  not  in  the  original ;  but  it  is  contained 
in  the  word  boar,  to  burn  up.  There  are  twenty-two 
words  that  are  translated  burn ;  this  is  the  strongest  of 
the  whole,  and  implies  a  flame  that  consumes.  The 
same  word  boar  is  the  original  in  all  the  passages  where 
the  words  '  burnt  up''  occur  in  the  English  version. 

The  word  may  be  found  tr.  bur?ied,  Ex.  3  :  2  ;  Deut. 
4  :  1 1  ;  9  :  15  ;  Est.  1:12;  Ps.  39  :  3  ;  Isa.  42  :  25  ;  it 
is  translated  bur?2X  in  Num.  11:  1^  3  ^  2  Chron.  28 :  3.   It 


248  BiBLi:  vs,  TRADrrroN. 

is  tr.  burUy  joined  with  JtrSj  in  Deut.  5  :  23  ;  Ps.  79  :  5 ; 
89  :  46  ;  Isa.  47  :  14  ;  Jer.  4:4.  In  Jer.  21  :  10,  the 
word  is  sorap^j  to  burn,  but  in  the  12;  v.  it  is^  boar  ;  Ez. 
5  :  2y  and  translated  bum,  it  occurs,  Isa.  1:31;  10:  17  ; 
40 :  16  ;  44  :  15  ;  Jer.  7  :  20 ;  Nah.  2  :  13  ;  Mai.  4 :  1.— 
Let  the  reader  examine  all  these  passages,  and  he  will 
be  convinced  that  the  word  implies  the  thorough  con- 
sumption of  all  the  things  to  which  it  is  applied. 

But,  continues  the  objector,  "  The  fire  that  burns  up 
the  wicked  is  called  '  eternal  fire,*  and  their  punishment 
is  called  'eternal  damnation.'  We  reply,  1.  That  it  is 
called  a  consuming  fire  and  a  devouring  fire  ;  and  if  it 
consumes  and  devours  it  must  utterfy  destroy  the  wicked'^ 

2.  Supposing  that  the  word  aidnas^  translated  '  eternal^ 
meant  what  the  English  word  imports,  without  begin- 
ning and  without  end — which  it  certainly  does  not,  and 
which  the  reader  will  see  when  we  discuss  the  meaning- 
of  this  word — even  when  taken  in  the  broadest  sense 
contended  for,  it  can  imply  no  more  than  that  the  instru- 
ment of  destruction  is  everlasting.  To  say  that  a  fire 
will  continue  to  burn  what  it  does  not  consume,  is  a 
solecism  in  language.  If  pure  gold  is  indestructible  in 
fire,  then  it  cannot  be  burned  ;  if  the  wicked  are  indes- 
tructible, they  can  neither  be  burned  nor  injured  by  fire* 

3.  Everlasting  fire,  or  fire  lasting  till  it  ha&  utterly  con- 
sumed its  fuel,  is  an  appropriate  emblem  of  total  and 
everlasting  destruction.  If  the  fire  were  not  to  last  thus 
long,  some  vestiges  of  the  wicked,  such  as  bones,  which 
are  the  most  indestructible,  might  possibly  remain.     And 

4.  "We  reply,  that  in  Heb>  6 :  2,  we  read  of "  eternal 
judgment,"  and  this  and  *  eternal  fire, ^  cmly  mean  that 
in  both  cases,  it  will  be  final,  the  results  will  be  everlast- 
ing ;  the  wicked  will  continue  burned  up ;  they  wil] 
never  rise  again  ;  they  will  be  consumed,  annihilated^ 
exterminated ;  they  will  remain  under  the  power  af 
death  for  ever ;  and  as  men,  they  will  be  as  though  they 
had  never  been.  It  is  frivolous  to  tell  us  that  the  ele- 
mentary principles  will  remain ;  we  know  that,  but  we 
know  too  that  as  living  men  or  beings  they  will  not  be^ 
Ashes  and  gases  are  not  conscious  beings,  and  to  such 
things  the  wicked  will  be  reduced. 


THE  WICKED  CEASE  TO  EXIST.  249 


THE  WICKED  MUST  FOR  EVER  CEASE  TO  EXIST. 

We  shall  quote  a  few  other  passages  that,  if  possible, 
still  more  emphatically  declare  the  wicked  will  be  totally 
blotted  out  of  existence.  Ps.  37 :  20,  "  The  wicked  shall 
perish,  and  the  enemies  of  the  Lord  shall  be  as  ih^fat 
of  lambs :  they  shall  consume ;  into  smoke  shall  they 
consume  away!^^  9  v,  "  For  evil  doers  shall  be  cut  off,.,. 
For  yet  a  little  while,  and  the  wicked  shall  not  be :  yea, 
thou  shalt  diligently  consider  his  place,  and  it  shall  not 
^."  If  the  place  of  the  wicked  is  to  be  in  hell,  and  they 
are  to  be  there  in  a  conscious  state,  then  they  will  neither 
be  "  cut  off"  nor  "  consumed,"  nor  "  perish,"  but  will  be 
alive  in  hell,  and  David  has  testified  falsely  concerning 
them.  But  as  .David  has  truly  testified,  and  is  in  perfect 
agreement  with  the  whole  tenor  of  the  word  of  God, 
then  are  modern  teachers,  who  preach  to  us  of  *  eternal 
torments,'  found  false  witnesses  before  God.  Five  times 
in  this  Psalm  are  the  wicked  said  to  be  "  cut  off."  34 
V,  "  Wait  on  the  Lord,  and  keep  his  way,  and  he  shall 
exalt  thee  to  inherit  the  land,  (the  land  promised  to 
Abraham  and  his  seed,  Christ)  :  when  the  wicked  are  cut 
off,  thou  shalt  see  it.  I  have  seen  the  wicked  in  great 
power, ....yet  he  passed  away^  and  lo,  he  was  not  ;  yea  I 
sought  him,  but  he  could  not  be  found."  38  v,  "  The 
transgressors  shall  he{shomad)  an?iihilated  together :  the 
end  of  the  wicked  shall  be  cut  off."  If  an  "  immortal 
isoul"  were  left,  then  this  language  cannot  be  true.  Com- 
pare all  this  with  Mai.  4  :  1-3,  where  he  describes  the 
wicked  as  being  "  burned  up  root  and  branch."  If  the 
soul  be  either  a  root,  or  branch,  or  part,  or  whole  of  the 
wicked,  it  is  utterly  consumed  with  him. 

Ezekiel  (26  :  18,)  prophesies  of  the  king  of  Tyre,  be- 
cause of  the  multitude  of  his  iniquities;  "  Therefore  will 
I  bring  forth  a  fire  from  the  midst  of  thee,  it  shall  de- 
vour thee,  and  I  will  bring  thee  to  ashes  upon  the  earth 
in  the  sight  of  all  them  that  behold  thee.... Thou  shalt  be 
a  terror,  and  neve?'  shalt  thou  be  any  more^  Mat.  3  : 
12  ;  Luke  3:17.  *'  His  winnowing  shovel  is  in  his  hand  ; 
and  he  will  thoroughly  cleanse  his  grain  ;  he  will  gather 
his  wheat  into  the  granary,  and  consume  the  chaff  in 
unquenchable  fire."     Mark,  the  unquenchable  fire  burns 


250  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

up,  or  consumes  the  chaff,  the  wicked ;  and  neither 
chaff  nor  the  wicked,  can  exist  after  they  are  burned  up, 
burned  ujy  root  and  branch.  Isa.  51:8,  "  For  the  moth 
shall  eat  them  up  like  a  garment,  and  the  worm  shall 
eat  them  hke  wool."  "Worms  and  unquenchable  fire 
alike  consume,  the  fire  can  not  be  quenched  till  it  has 
thoroughly  performed  its  office ;  when  the  carcase  is  en- 
tirely consumed,  the  fire  will  of  course  go  out,  though  it 
cannot  be  put  out  while  the  fuel  lasts.  Paul,  in  Heb. 
1 2 :  29,  calls  God  a  consuming  fire,  not  a  tormenting 
fire,  fire  cannot  torment  without  consuming.  In  Job  31  : 
12,  ''  It  is  a  fire  that  consumeth  to  destruction ;"  not  a 
fire  that  preserveth  to  torment.  Isa.  9 :  19,  "  Through 
the  wrath  of  the  Lord  of  hosts  is  the  land  darkened,  and 
the  people  shall  be  dL^maakhesheth^  a  devouring,  or  thing 
to  be  devoured,  for  the  fire."  The  margin  says  meat, 
but  the  same  word  occurs  Ez.  21  :  32,  connected  with 
the  coming  of  him  whose  right  it  is  to  reign  on  the  throne 
of  David,  and  the  judgments  he  will  then  execute.  '^  I 
will  pour  out  my  indignation  upon  thee,  I  will  blow 
against  thee  in  the  fire  of  my  wrath,  and  deliver  thee 
into  the  hand  of  brutish  men,  skillful  to  destroy.  Thou 
shalt  be  for  fuel  {maaJdiesheth^  a  thing  to  be  devoured)  for 
the  fire  ;  thy  blood  shall  be  in  the  midst  of  the  land ;  thou 
shalt  be  no  more  reraembered :  for  I  the  Lord  have 
spoken  it."  The  same  word  occurs  in  Ez.  15:4,  6, 
where  it  is  applied  to  the  wood  of  the  vine  tree,  and  the 
wicked  are  compared  with  it,  as  fit  only  to  be  burned. — 
And  God  says,  5  v.  '■'-  Behold,  when  it  was  whole,  it  was 
fit  for  no  work  :  how  much  less  shall  it  be  yet  fit  for  any 
work  when  the  fire  hath  devoured  it  and  it  is  burned  ?" 
But  if  the  wicked  have  something  in  them  that  cannot 
be  burned,  such  a  thing  as  an  "  immortal  soul,"  there 
would  be  no  similitude ;  that  soul  would  yet  be  fit  for 
something,  if  it  were  only  for  "  eternal  torment." 

Ps.  73  :  19,  "  How  are  they  brought  into  desolation, 
as  in  a  moment !  they  are  utterly  consumed  with  terrors." 
2  Sam.  23 :  7,  They'like  thorns  "  shall  be  utterly  burned 
with  fire."  2  Pet.  2  :  12,  They  "  shall  utterly  perish  in 
their  own  corruption."  Surely  the  soul  does  not  escape 
when'the  wicked  are  ^  utterl;^  burned,'  '  utterly  consum- 
ed,* when  they  '  utterly  perish' ! !  Isa.  47  :  14,  "  Behold, 
they  shall  be  as  stubble;  the  fire  shall  burn  them  ;  tbey 


THE   WICKED    CEASE   TO    EXIST.  251 

shall  not  deliver  their  souls  from  the  power  of  the  flame." 
Isa.  10  :  17,  18,  *'  The  Light  of  Israel  (Christ)  shall  be  for 
a  fire,  and  his  Holy  One  for  a  flame ;  and  it  shall  burn 
and  devour  his  thorns  and  his  briers  in  one  day ;  and 
shall  consume  the  glory  of  the  forest,  and  of  his  fruitful 
field,  both  soul  and  body?'^  That  is,  both  flesh  and  be- 
ing. Both  these  texts  declare  that  the  soul  is  burned. 
To  affirm  that  the  soul  is  not  burned  up,  is  equal  to  say- 
ing that  the  man  is  not  burned  up.  Yea,  God  will  des- 
troy *  both  body  and  soul  in  Gehenna.'  Mat  10 :  28. 
David  prays,  Ps.  7 :  9,  ^'  Oh  let  the  wickedness  of  the 
wicked  come  to  an  end^  A  prayer  dictated  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  equal  to  a  declaration  that  the  thing  shall  be. 
But  the  wickedness  of  the  wicked  will  only  end  when 
they  are  destroyed. 

Were  a  theologian  of  these  days  to  utter  this  idea  he 
would  be  rebuked  by  his  compeers  with  the  declaration, 
that  '*  the  wicked  will  increase  in  wickedness,  and  blas- 
pheme God  to  all  eternity."  But  let  us  hear  David 
again.  Ps.  10;  15,  "  Break  thou  the  arm  (or  power)  of 
the  wicked  and  the  evil  man  :  seiBk  out  his  wickedness 
till  thou  find  none.  The  Lord  is  King  for  ever  and  ever : 
the  heathen  are  perished  out  of  his  land."  When  Christ 
has  fully  established  his  kingdom^  there  will  ba  no  wick- 
edness to  be  found.  Why  ?  The  TJniversahst  tells  us, 
because  God  will  cleanse  the  wicked.  The  believer  in 
eternal  torments  tells  us  flatly,  *  It  is  not  so,  the  wicked 
will  continue  to  blaspheme  God  in  a  helP  of '  eternal  tor- 
ment.^ But  the  Bible  tells  us,~Rev.  5  :  13,  "  And  every 
creature  which  is  in  heaven,  and  on  the  earth,  and  under 
the  earth,  and  such  as  are  in  the  sea,  and  all  that  are  in 
them,  were  heard,  saying.  Blessing  and  honor,  and  glory 
and  power,  be  unto  him  that  sitteth  upon  the  throne, 
and  unto  the  Lamb  for  ever  and  ever,"  All  that  are 
living  at  that  time  will  praise  the  Lamb.  But  where 
are  the  wicked?  Ps.  9:5,"  Thou  hast  rebuked  the 
heathen,  thou  hast  destroyed  the  wicked^  thou  hast  put 
out  their  name  for  ever  and  ever."  Ps.  69  :  28.  Their 
name  has  been  blotted  out  of  the  book  of  the  hving 
For  says  Job  36  :  6,  "  He  preserveth  not  the  life  of  the 
wickedy  For  God  will  not  contend  for  ever  neither  will 
he  be  always  wroth.  Isa.  57  :  16.  Ps.  37  :  10,  "  For  yet 
a  little  while  and  the  wicked  shall  not  be."    Isa.  41  :  12, 


252  BIBLE   VS.  TRADITION. 

*'  Thou  shalt  seek  them,  and  shalt  not  find  them,  even 
them  that  contended  with  thee  :  they  that  war  against 
thee  shall  be  as  nothing,  and  as  a  thing  of  nought."  See 
also  Isa.  22  :  14 ;  Ez.  35  :  5  ;  and  Isa.  10  :  25.  "  For  yet 
a  very  little  while,  and  the  indignation  shall  cease^  and 
mine  anger  in  their  destruction."  Thus  the  controversy 
between  God  and  the  wicked  will  end,  the  indignation  of 
God  will  cease.  The  wicked  will  be  utterly  extermina- 
ted. Acts  8 :  22,  **  Eor  Moses  truly  said  unto  the  fa- 
thers, A  prophet  shall  the  Lord  your  God  raise  up  unto 
you  of  your  brethren,  like  unto  me ;  him  shall  ye  hear 
in  all  things  whatsoever  he  shall  say  unto  you. — 
And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that  every  (psuche)  soul, 
which  will  not  hear  that  prophet,  [eooolothreuthese- 
tai  ek  tou  laou,)  shall  be  utterly  exterminated  out  of, 
or  out  from  among,  the  people."  There  will  exist 
no  wickedj  for  their  very  souls,  or  beings  will  be  exter- 
minated. 

Well  might  Jeremiah  pray,  (10  :  24,)  "  0  Lord,  correct 
me,  but  with  judgment ;  not  in  thine  anger,  lest  thou 
bring  me  to  nothing."  Isa.  41:  11,  "  Behold,  all  they 
that  w^ere  incensed  against  thee  shall  be  ashamed  and 
confounded :  they  shall  be  as  nothing  ;  and  they  that 
strive  with  thee  shall  perish.  Thou  shalt  seek  them,  and 
shalt  not  find  them^  even  them  that  contended  with  thee  : 
they  that  war  against  thee  shall  be  as  nothing,  and  as  a 
thing  of  nought."  Can  a  soul  brought  to  nothing,  suf- 
fer ^  endless  misery'  ?  Job  6  :  18,  "  The  paths  of  their 
w^ay  are  turned  aside ;  they  go  to  nothing  and  perish." 
Job  .8  :  22,  "  The  dwelling  place  of  the  wicked  shall  come 
to  nought."  Margin^  not  be.  So  the  wicked  will  have 
no  place  to  exist  in ;  even  God  cannot  find  them,  they 
wall  have  perished  out  of  existence. 

Ps.  104 :  35,  "  Let  the  sinners  be  consumed  out  of  the 
earth,  and  let  the  wicked  be  no  more."  The  reader  will 
remember,  that  "  the  earth  has  been  given  to  the  children 
of  men"  ;  that  the  righteous  are  to  be  rewarded  in  the 
earth,  and  the  wicked  are  to  be  punished  in  the  earth. 

The  invention  of  an  immortal  soul,  has  necessitated  the 
invention  of  a  place  to  put  it  in  ;  hence  has  arisen  a  fa- 
bled heaven  "  beyond  the  bounds  of  time  and  space,"  a 
hell  in  which  to  punish  and  torment  the  wicked  for  ever ; 
but  in  the  Bible  we  find  that  to  root  a  sinner  out  of  tho 


THE    WICKED    CEASE    TO    EXIST.  253 

earth,  is  made  by  a  parallelism,  equal  to  the  destruction 
of  his  being.     Ps.  59:  13,  "  Consume  them  in  wrath,  con- 
sume them,  that  they  may  not  be^     Ps.  1 19  :  19,  "  Thou 
puttest  away  (or  shovath^  thou  causest  to  cease)  all  the 
wicked  of  the  earth  like   {seegeem^  cinders  or)  dross." 
Ps.  9:5,  "  Thou  hast  rebuked  the  heathen,  thou  hast 
destroyed  the  wicked,  thou  hast  put  out  their  name  for 
ever  and  ever."   Prov.  10  :  25.    "  As  the  whirlwind  pass- 
eth,  so  are  the  wicked  no  more :  but  the  righteous  are 
an  everlasting  foundation."     27  v,  "  The  fear  of  the  Lord 
prolongeth  (or  addeth)  days  :  but  the  years  of  the  wick- 
ed shall  be  shortened."     But  the  duration  of  an  ^  immor- 
tal' soul  can  neither  be  increased  nor  diminished.     Prov. 
12:7,"  The  wicked  are  overthrown  and  are  not :  but 
the  house  (or  family)  of  the  righteous  shall  stand."     Ez. 
32 :  7,  "  When  I  shall   (kovoh)  extinguish  thee,  I  will 
cover  the  heaven   and   make   the  stars  thereof  dark." 
Lam.  3  :  66,  "  Persecute  and  destroy  them  in  anger  from 
under  the  heavens  of  the  Lord."     Job  20  :  5-9,  "  The 
triumphing  of  the  wicked  is  short.. ..He  shall  perish  for 
ever  like  his  own  dung :  they  which  have  seen  him  shall 
say.  Where  is  he  ?     He  shall  fly  away  as  a  dream,  and 
shall  not  be  found  :  yea,  he  shall  be  chased  away  as  a 
vision  of  the  night.     The  eye  also  which  saw  him  shall 
see  him  no  more ;  neither  shall  his  place  any  more  behold 
him."     Speaking  of  Babylon  and  of  the  Chaldeans,  Isa. 
43  :  16,  17,  says,  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord.. ..who  bringeth 
forth  the  chariot  and  horse,  the  army  and  the  power ; 
they  shall  lie  down  together,  they  shall  not  rise  :  they 
are  extinct,  they  are  quenched  as  tow."     We  know  not 
what  language  could  more  emphatically  set  forth  the  an- 
nihilation of  the  wicked  than  the  foregoing.     Nah.  1  :  9, 
"  What  do  ye  imagine  against  the  Lord  ?  he  will  make 
an  utter  end :  affliction  shall  not  rise  up  the  second  time. 
For  while  they  be  folden  as  thorns,  and  while  they  are 
drunken  as  drunkards,  they  (his  enemies)  shall  be  de- 
voured as  stubble  fully  dry."     Amos  8  :  14,  "  They  that 
swear  by  the  sin  of  Samaria,  and  say,  thy  Grod,  O  Dan, 
liveth ;  even  they  shall  fall,  and  never  rise  up  again." — 
Ob.  15-18.     "For  the  day  of  the  Lord  is  near.. ..For  as 
ye  have  drunk  upon  my  holy  mountain,  so  shall  all  the 
heathen  drink  continually,  yea,  they  shall  drink,  and  they 
shall  swallow  down,  and  they  shall  be  as  though  they 


254  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

HAD  NOT  BEEN.  Aiid  the  housG  of  Jacob  shall  be  a  fire, 
and  the  house  of  Joseph  a  flame,  and  the  house  of  Esau 
for  stubble,  and  they  shall  kindle  in  them,  and  devour 
them  ;  and  there  shall  not  be  any  remaining  of  the  house 
of  Esau  ;  for  the  Lord  hath  spoken  it." 

We  have  presented  fifty  texts  that  clearly  prove  the 
wicked  will  become  extinct ;  and  in  all  two  hundred  and 
thirty  plain  declarations  of  the  Holy  Bible,  that  the 
wicked  will  be  destroyed  without  remedy,  body  and  soul, 
root  and  branch,  all  of  them  will  become  as  nothing,  they 
will  have  no  existence.  It  is  in  vain  to  plead  that  some 
of  these  texts  may  apply  to  judgments  that  have  already 
been  executed ;  it  is  obvious  that  they  apply  to  the 
wicked  as  a  class — and  not  to  the  righteous — and  speak 
of  the  end  of  their  existence.  If  the  objector  will  under- 
take to  prove  from  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  that 
the  wicked,  who  have  had  sentence  passed  upon  them 
judicially,  will  be  raised  again,  then  these  numerous  pas- 
sages  will  only  apply  to  a  judicial  sentence  to  be  execu- 
ted upon  them  soon  after  their  resurrection.  Although 
the  resurrection  of  the  righteous  is  taught  inferentially 
in  the  promise  made  to  Abraham  and  in  the  promises  of 
life,  and  in  many  clear  cases,  yet  we  know  of  no  clear 
passage  in  the  Old  Testament  that  distinctly  teaches  that 
the  heathen  and  those  who  have  not  heard  the  gospel, 
will  be  judged  by  a  law  of  which  they  have  not  heard. 
Dan.  12:  2,  does  not  teach  it;  ^^  And  many  of  those 
that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth  shall  awake,  these  to 
everlasting  life,  and  those  to  reproach  and  everlasting 
abhorrence."  This  rather  teaches  the  contrary.  The 
word  some  has  no  corresponding  word  in  Hebrew.  Does 
a  captious  reader  ask.  Can  the  dead  be  held  in  everlast- 
ing abhorrence?  We  refer  him  to  page  fifty-three  in . 
Judea  Capta.,  "  Vespasian  made  a  present  of  a  vast  num- 
ber of  the  Jews,  his  own  subjects,  to  Agrippa,  with  free 
leave  to  dispose  of  them  as  he  pleased;  but  Agrippa,  to 
his  shame  and  everlasting  disgrace^  sold  these  also  into 
slavery."  That  celebrated  writer.  Sir  Walter  Scott,  ia 
his  history  of  Napoleon,  speaks  of  his  hero's  conduct  on 
one  occasion  thus  :  "  To  his  shame  and  everlasting  dis- 
grace be  it  spoken." 

The  penalty  of  the  law  is  death  ;  and  this  penalty  God 
has  so  often  threatened  the  transgressor,  that  it  seemg 


THE   WICKED    CEASE    TO    EXIST.  255 

needless  to  enumerate  all  the  places  where  it  may  be 
found.  This  penalty  must  be  inflicted  upon  the  unfor- 
given  sinner,  or  the  word  of  God  must  fail.  Perpetual 
life  in  extreme  misery  is  not  death,  in  any  sense  of  the 
word.  The  subterfuge  that  the  penalty  includes  eternal 
death,  or  spiritual  death,  or  everlasting  torments,  and 
the  death  of  the  body  merely,  but  not  of  the  soul,  will 
avail  little ;  for  Christ  did  not  suffer  spiritual  death,  nor 
eternal  death,  nor  everlasting  death,  nor  everlasting  tor- 
ments ;  but  he  gave  his  hfe,  his  soul,  his  being,  to  ran- 
som his  people  from  death — from  unconsciousness.  As 
death,  the  extinction  of  being,  is  threatened  to  man 
on  the  one  hand,  so  life,  the  perpetuation  of  being,  is 
promised  to  the  faithful  on  the  other. 

As  the  gospel  covenant,  entered  into  with  Abraham, 
included  the  promise  that  God  should  emphatically  be- 
come his  God — as  well  as  the  everlasting  inheritance  of 
the  land  of  Canaan  in  its  renewed  state — under  the  reign 
of  his  seed,  Christ — and  as,  in  conjunction  with  these 
promises  Abraham  was  told  that  he  should  die  in  a  good 
old  age — and  as  Abraham  could  only  inherit  this  land 
by  a  resurrection  from  the  dead  ;  so  the  promise  of  the 
possession  of  this  inheritance,  was  equivalent  to  the 
promise  of  everlasting  life,  and  of  a  resurrection  from  the 
dead.  So  Abraham  understood  it,  and  so  Christ  inter- 
preted it.  Compare  Exo.  6 :  3,  "  I  appeared  unto  Abra- 
ham, unto  Isaac,  and  unto  Jacob,  by  the  name  of  God 
Almighty,  but  by  my  name  Jehovah  (the  fulfiller  of  the 
pt  oniises)  was  I  not  known  unto  them.  And  I  have  also 
established  my  covenant  tvith  thern^  to  give  them  the 
land  of  Canaan^  the  land  of  their  'pilgrimage^  wherein 
they  were  strangers."  But  God  made  another  covenant 
with  Abraham  as  a  token  or  pledge  that  he  would  ful- 
fill the  first  covenant ;  for  Abraham  had  said,  "  Whereby 
shall  I  know  that  I  shall  inherit  it  ?"  (the  land).  God 
said.  Gen.  15  :  13,  "  Know  of  surety  that  thy  seed  shall 
be  a  stranger  in  a  land  that  is  not  theirs,  and  shall  serve 
them  ;  and  they  shall  aflflict  them  four  hundred  years.  . . 
but  in  the  fourth  generation  they  shall  come  hither  again"; 
(into  the  land  of  Canaan).  "  God  remembered  his  co- 
venant with  Abraham,"  and  God  said,  Exo.  6  :  8,  "  I 
will  bring  you  unto  the  land,  concerning  the  which  I  did 
swear  to  give  it  to  Abraham^  to  Isaac^  and  to  Jacoby 


256  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

(who  had  been  dead  four  hundred  years,)  and  I  will  give 
it  you  for  a  heritage  :  I  am  Jehovah"  (the  fuliiller  of  the 
promises).  Now  read  Heb.  11:8,  "  By  faith  Abraham, 
when  called  to  go  out  into  the  place  which  he  was  after- 
wards to  receive  as  an  inheritance,  obeyed... .and  journey- 
ed into  the  land  of  promise,  as  into  a  strange  land,  dwell- 
ing (only)  in  tents  (not  in  substantial  habitations,  with) 
....the  fellow  heirs  of  the  same  promise ;  for  he  looked 
for  the  city  that  hath  foundations.... These  all  died  in 
faith,  not  having  received  the  promises^  but  having  seen 
them  AFAR  OFF,  and  embraced  them,  and  having  confes- 
sed that  they  were  strangers  and  pilgrims  in  the  land 
(that  God  had  promised  them).  For  they,  who  say  such 
things,  show  that  they  are  seeking  their  own  country^ 
(in  its  heavenly  state).  Wherefore  God  is  not  ashamed 
of  them  to  be  called  their  God  ;  for  he  hath  prepared  for 
them  a  city ;"  (the  New  Jerusalem,  to  be  located  upon 
Mount  Zion,  the  identical  spot  now  trodden  under  foot 
by  the  Gentiles,  the  Turks).  Our  Saviour,  reasoning 
upon  what  is  implied  in  these  promises,  argues,  Luke  20  : 
37,  because  God  is  the  God  of  Abraham,  therefore 
Abraham  must  arise  from  the  dead  to  inherit  the  land. 
Hence  the  promise  of  perpetually  inheriting  the  land 
was  equivalent  to  the  promise  of  perpetual  life ;  and  the 
non-inheritance  of  it  was  equal  to  perpetual  death.  Very 
many  texts  contain  the  promise  of  life  and  the  threaten- 
ing of  death,  or  the  extinction  of  being,  under  the  idea 
of  the  possession  of  this  inheritance  on  the  one  hand,  and 
the  being  driven  out  of  it,  or  destroyed  out  of  it,  on  the 
other. 

A  FEW  EXAMPLES  OF  THE  THREATENING  OF  DEATH. 

Ez.  18  :  20,  "  The  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die^  17  v, 
"  He  shall  not  die,''  18  v,  "  He  shall  die.''  21  v,  "  Have 
I  any  pleasure  at  all  that  the  wicked  should  die  ?"  Eead 
many  similar  expressions  throughout  the  chapter.  Prov. 
15:  10,  "  He  thathateth  reproof  shall  die."  Prov.  19: 
16,  "  He  that  despiseth  my  ways  shall  die."  Ez.  33  :  8, 
The  ^'  wicked  man  shall  die  in  his  iniquity."  See  many 
examples  in  this  chapter.  Deut.  30  :  15,  "  See,  I  have 
set  before  you  this  day,  life  and  good,  death  and  evil." 
Jer.  21  :  8,  "  I  have  set  before  you  the  way  oilife  and 


THE    GREAT    GOSPEL    OFFER    IS    LIFE.  257 

the  way  of  deaths     Eom.  6  :  23,  "  The  wages  of  sin  is 
deaths     21  v,  "  The  end  of  those  things  is  deaths — 
Jam.  1  :  15,  "Sin,  when  finished,  bringeth  forth  death?'* 
"  If  ye  beheve  not  that  I  am  he,  ye  shall  die  in  your  ' 
sins." 

LIFE,  IN    THE    SENSE    OF    CONSCIOUS    EXISTENCE,  IS    THE 
GREAT    OFFER    OF    THE    GOSPEL. 

The  gospel  originated  in  the  benevolence  of  God,  and 
its  provisions  were  adapted  to  the*  emergencies  of  the 
condition  of  man.  Man  being  mortal,  and  not  having 
access  to  the  tree  of  hfe,  in  consequence  of  sin,  became 
liable  to  suffering  and  death  ;  but  Christ  being  offered  a 
sacrifice  for  sins,  has  ransomed  his  people  from  death,  by 
a  promised  resurrection  from  the  dead  at  the  coming  of 
their  deliverer  to  estabhsh  his  kingdom  over  the  land 
promised  to  our  fathers,  to  Abraham  and  his  seed  for 
ever.  "  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only 
begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  beheveth  in  him  should  not 
perish  but  have  everlasting  life."  "  I  am  come,"  says 
Christ,  ''  that  they  might  have  life."  The  very  object 
for  which  the  gospel  was  written  was  to  teach  two  great 
truths.  John  20  :  31,  "  These  are  written  that  ye  might 
beheve  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God ; 
and  that  believing  ye  might  have  life  through  his 
name."  I  John  :  2 :  25,  "  And  this  is  the  promise  that 
he  hath  promised  us,  (even)  aionion  life^  4:9,  "  God 
sent  his  only  begotten  Son  into  the  world,  that  w^e  might 
live  through  him."  5  :  9,  "  This  is  the  witness  of  God 
which  he  hath  testified  of  his  Son.  He  that  believeth 
on  the  Son  of  God  hath  the  witness  in  himself:  he  that 
believeth  not,  makes  God  a  liar ;  because  he  beheveth 
not  the  testimony  that  God  hath  witnessed  concerning 
his  Son.  And  this  is  the  testimony,  that  God  hath  given 
unto  us  {zoen  aionion)  the  lije  pertaining  to  the  age  {of 
the  Messiah^)  and  this  hfe  is  in  his  Son.  He  that  hath 
the  Son  hath  the  life,  (or  this  life;  ten  zoen^)  and  he 
that  hath  not  the  Son  of  God  hath  not  the  life^ 

In  the  Syriac  version,  all  these  passages  occur;  and 
in  the  place  of  the  Greek  words  save^  salvation^  and  Sa- 
vior^ appear  the  words  live^  life^  and  Life-giver,  Indeed 
the  Greek  w^ord  for  life  (zoe^  is  from  the  same  root  as  is 


258  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

the  Syriac  word  for  life,  and  the  giving  of  life  and  salva- 
tion are  made  synonymous  terms.  Christ  says,  "  I  am 
the  resurrection  and  the  life"  ;  and  Peter  accused  the 
Jews  of  killing  the  Author  of  JLife. 

A    FIGURATIVE    MEANING    TO    THE    TERMS    LIFE    AND    DEATH 
IS    NOT    GENERALLY   ADMISSIBLE. 

Most  of  our  readers  have  been  taught  that  the  terms 
life  and  death,  mean  eternal  glory  and  happiness  on  the 
one  hand,  and  endless  misery  in  a  hell  of  fire  upon  the 
other.  IJpon  what  grounds  must  the  literal  meaning  of 
the  terms  life  and  death  be  explained  away  ?  Because, 
forsooth,  theologians  have  assumed  that  man  is  immortal, 
and  therefore,  life,  in  the  sense  of  conscious  existence, 
cannot  be  the  great  offer  of  the  Bible  ;  nor  can  literal 
death  be  the  portion  of  '^  immortal  souls."  But  we  beg 
leave  to  demur,  and  demand  the  proof  When  Christ 
gave  his  life  for  the  world.  Did  he  give  his  eternal  glory 
and  happiness  ?  Will  these  tamperers  with  the  word  of 
the  living  God  explain  John  12  :  25,  "  He  that  loveth  his 
life  shall  lose  it ;  and  he  that  hateth  his  life  in  this  world 
shall  keep  it  unto  life  eternal"  ?  Did  Christ  teach  that 
a  man  could  have  eternal  glory  and  happiness  in  this 
world^  and  hate  it  ? 

But  this  life  is  often  contrasted  with  the  life  to  be  im- 
parted by  Christ  in  such  a  manner  that  it  cannot  be 
made  to  mean  eternal  glory  and  happiness.  "  If  in  this 
life  only  we  have  hope  in  Christ  we  are  of  all  men  most 
miserable."  If  endless  Hfe  be  the  great  promise  of  the 
gospel,  how  can  man  be  immortal  irrespective  of  the  gos- 
pel ?  How  can  God  give  eternal  life  to  his  servants 
only,  if  all  men  naturally  possess  it  ?  Apply  the  same 
principle  of  interpretation  to  the  Bible  generally,  and  the 
whole  may  be  turned  into  foolishness.  But  he  who  be- 
lieves the  Bible,  receives  it  according  to  the  obvious  ac- 
ceptation of  the  words  in  which  it  is  written,  so  far  as  he 
can  understand  the  sense  they  were  designed  to  convey. 

We  will  give  a  few  examples  of  the  terms  in  which 
endless  life  is  promised,  that  behevers  of  God's  word 
may  have  strong  consolation,  who  have  laid  hold  on  the 
hope  set  before  them  in  the  g08i)el. 


TERMS   USED   IN    PROMISES    OF   LIFE.  259 


TitE    TERMS    WHICH    CONVEY    THE     PROMISE    OF    EVERLASTING 
LIFE. 

Of  all  those  passages  that  secure  the  endless  life  of  the 
righteous,  the  negative  forms  of  expression  are  the 
strongest  and  most  expressive.  Let  the  reader  bear  in 
mind  that  God  hath  promised  Jesus  life  without  end,  and  a 
kingdom  without  an  end,  and  therefore,  says  Christ — 
"  Because  I  hve  ye  shall  live  also."  Luke  1 :  3*2,  "  He 
shall  be  called  the  Son  of  the  Highest ;  and  the  Lord 
God  shall  give  unto  him  the  throne  of  his  father  David  : 
and  he  shall  reign  over  the  house  of  Jacob  for  ever ;  and 
his  kingdom  [puk  estai  telos)  shall  be  without  an  end.^"* 
Eom.  8  :  17,  Christians  are  "  heirs  of  God,  d^ndi  joint  heirs 
with  Christ,"  of  this  kingdom.  Heb.  7  :  15,  "  After  the 
similitude  of  Melchizedek  there  ariseth  another  priest, 
who  is  made,  not  according  to  the  law  of  corporeal  in- 
junctions, {alia  kata  dunamin  zoes  akata  lutoa^  but  ac- 
cording to  the  energy  of  an  indissoluble  life^  Heb.  6 : 
17,  "  Therefore  God  being  abundantly  wilhng  to  show 
to  the  heirs  of  the  promise^  that  his  promising  was  irre- 
versible, bound  it  up  in  an  oath  ;  so  that  by  two  things 
which  change  not^  and  in  which  God  cannot  he,  we,  who 
have  sought  refuge  in  him,  might  have  great  consolation, 
and  might  hold  fast  the  hope  promised  us ;  which  is  to 
us  as  an  anchor,  that  retaineth  our  soul,  so  that  it  swer- 
veth  not ;  and  it  entereth  into  that  within  the  veil,  whi- 
ther Jesus  hath  previously  entered  for  us,  and  hath  be- 
come a  priest  for  ages,  after  the  likeness  of  Melchize- 
dek." 

Mat.  6  :  20 ;  Luke  12 :  32,  "  Fear  not,  httle  flock  ;  for 
it  is  your  Father's  good  pleasure  to  give  you  the  king- 
dom." "  Sell  what  ye  have  and  give  alms ;  provide 
yourselves  bags  that  wax  not  old,  a  treasure  in  the  hea- 
vens that  faileth  not :  where  no  thief  approacheth, 
neither  moth  corruptethy  Heb.  10:  34,  "  Ye  cheerfully 
endured  the  plundering  of  your  goods,  knowing  that  in 
heaven  ye  had  a  more  enduring  substance."  God  has 
said,  Heb.  13  :  5,  "  I  will  never  leave  thee^  no,  no,  I  will 
never  forsake  thee^  Heb.  12  :  28,  "  Wherefore  we  re- 
ceiving a  kingdom  that  cannot  be  moved^  let  us.... serve 
God  acceptably."     1  Pet.  1:3,  "  Blessed  be  the  God 


260  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who,  according  to 
his  abundant  mercy  hath  begotten  us  again  to  a  hope  of 
life^  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead, 
to  an  inheritance  incorruptible  and  undefiled,  and  that 
fadeth  not  away^  reserved  in  the  heaven  for  you  that  are 
kept  by  the  power  of  God,  through  faith,  unto  a  salva- 
tion which  is  ready  to  be  revealed  in  the  last  time,"  (of 
this  age).  Luke  20  :  35,  "  The  children  of  this  age  mar- 
ry and  are  given  in  marriage ;  but  those  who  shall  be 
esteemed  worthy  to  possess  that  age,  and  the  resurrec- 
tion out  from  among  the  dead,  neither  marry,  nor  are 
given  in  marriage  ;  nor  can  they  die  any  more  ;  for  they 
will  be  like  angels^  and  be  the  sons  of  God^  being  the 
sons  of  the  resurrection^  1  Pet.  5:4,"  When  the  chief 
Shepherd  slwdl  appear^  ye  shall  receive  a  crown  of  glory 
\k\2X  fadeth  not  atvo.yy  John  10  :  27,  "  My  sheep,  as  1 
told  you,  obey  my  voice ;  I  know  them,  and  they  follow 
me.  Besides,  I  give  them  life  throughout  the  age  ;  and 
they  shall  never  perish^  neither  shall  any  one  wrest  them 
out  of  my  hands."  John  11  :  25,  "  I  am  the  resurrection 
and  the  hfe  ;  he  that  beheveth  in  me,  though  he  were 
dead,  yet  shall  he  live,  and  whosoever  hveth  and  be- 
lieveth  in  me,  shall  not  die  (eis  ton  aionn)  at  the  age." — 
Keader  !  "  BeHevest  thou  this  ?"  John  6  :  50,  "  This  is 
the  bread  that  cometh  down  from  heaven,  so  that  any 
one  may  eat  thereof  and  not  die^ 

But  there  are  still  stronger  expressions  than  any  that 
we  have  yet  quoted.  The  very  words  that  indicate  the 
endless  existence  of  God  are  applied  to  the  resurrected 
saints.  The  terms  without  corruptibility  and  without 
death,  are  appUed  to  the  nature  that  the  righteous  will 
have  conferred  upon  them  when  they  shall  arise  from 
the  dead.  Aj)hthartos^  and  aphtharsia^  without  corrup- 
tion, are  applied  to  denote  the  unending  nature  of  God 
in  Kom.  1 :  23 ;  1  Tim.  1  :  17  ;  and  to  the  resurrected 
saints  in  Eom.  2:7;  1  Cor.  15  :  42,  50,  52,  53,  54;  2 
Tim.  1  :  10;  1  Pet.  1  :  4,  23.  Athanasia^v^\\ho\xi  death, 
or  deathlessness,  is  applied  to  God,  1  Tim.  6:16,  and  to 
the  resurrected  saints  in  1  Cor.  15  :  53,  54 ;  9 :  21 ;  Isa. 
45  •  17,  18. 

But  how  shall  we  adequately  express  the  force  of  the 
sublime  language  of  Paul  in  2  Cor.  4:7,''  For  our  hght 
afflictions  which  quickly  pass  away,  prepareth  us  for, 


TERMS   USED   IN   PROMISES   OF    LIFE..  261 

{Jcath  huperbolen  eis  huperholen  aionion  haros  doxes  hater- 
gazetai  liemin^)  a  burden  of  glory  superabundantly 
transcending  the  aionion  or  age-lasting  glory."  Here  is 
superabundance  piled  upon  superabundance  of  glory  be- 
yond aionion. 

Whatever  period  therefore  aionion  may  express,  it 
cannot  possibly  be  put  in  comparison  with  the  duration 
of  the  righteous.     Glory  be  to  God. 

Hitherto  we  have  omitted  those  texts  that  contain 
aionion^  often  translated  '  eternal'  and  *  everlasting,'  be- 
cause we  question  the  propriety  of  such  translation. — 
We  see  how  little  we  should  lose  if  every  promise  bound- 
ed by  aionion  were  stricken  from  the  book  of  God.  We 
still  should  have  the  everlasting  inheritance  guaranteed 
and  secured  by  the  most  positive  and  undoubted  terms. 
In  like  manner  is  the  doom  of  the  wicked  irreversibly 
fixed ;  not  by  the  equivocal  application  of  the  word 
aionion  to  their  fate ;  but  by  such  negative  terms  as 
*  shall  not  see  life  ;'  and  the  equally  plain  and  positive 
expressions  we  have  set  forth  in  the  preceding  pages. 


262 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


THE    MEANING    OF    THE    ORIGINAL    TERMS    TRANSLAl'ED 
*  ETERNAL,'  'EVERLASTING,'  &C. 

Before  we  can  give  a  clear  exposition  of  a  few  texts,  and 
meet  the  objections  of  the  Universalists  on  the  one  hand, 
and  the  reputed  orthodox  on  the  other,  we  shall  investi- 
gate the  true  meaning  of  the  words  translated  '  eternal,' 
*  for  ever,'  '  world,'  and  such  like,  as  are  found  in  the 
common  version.  We  are  by  no  means  dependent  upon 
these  words  for  the  complete  establishment  of  every 
point  we  have  attempted  to  prove ;  we  could  spare  them 
all  and  yet  have  a  superabundance  of  proof  But  as 
there  are  five  passages  connected  with  these  words  that 
Professor  Stuart  claims  as  teaching  "  everlasting  misery," 
we  shall  show  the  Scripture  use  of  these  words  ;  and  we 
shall  not  only  succeed  in  harmonizing  these  texts  with 
the  current  teaching  of  the  Bible,  but  shall  Hkewise  suc- 
ceed in  turning  these  batteries  against  our  opposers. 

We  have  said,  w^e  are  satisfied  with  the  definitions  of 
these  words  as  given  in  English,  so  far  as  our  argument 
is  affected  thereby ;  but  we  shall  find  that  these  words 
are  by  no  means  the  fair  representatives  of  the  Hebrew 
and  Greek  terms.  We  remark  that  the  uninitiated  in 
ancient  languages,  being  persons  of  sound  judgment,  and 
having  before  them  all  the  passages  where  any  word  oc- 
curs, if  it  be  frequently  repeated,  are  as  competent  to 
judge  of  the  meaning  of  such  word,  as  are  the  learned 
themselves. 

We  believe  that  oulom  uniformly  means  an  age,  with- 
out at  all  defining  the  limits  of  its  duration  ;  and  that  it 


MEANING    OF    OULOM    AND    AlON.  263 

always  refers  to  a  definite  period,  or  age,  having  a  he- 
gi7i7iing  and  an  end,  excepting  when  it  refers  to  "  the 
age^'  emphatically  ;  meaning  the  age  or  era  of  Christ's 
personal  reign  ;  which  we  learn  from  other  expressions, 
wdll  be  everlasting.  The  duration  of  the  age  referred  to 
by  the  word  oulom  may  be  very  short  or  very  long, 
as  oidom  by  no  means  expresses  its  duration.  It 
sometimes  expresses  an  age  lasting  three  days;  forty 
days ;  a  jubilee  of  seven  years ;  a  jubilee  of  fifty  years ; 
a  generation ;  the  whole  of  a  life  time;  the  remaining 
part  of  a  life  time  from  a  specified  period ;  the  age  of 
the  covenant  of  circumcision,  the  age  of  the  supremacy 
of  the  Mosaic  law  ;  the  age  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood  ; 
the  age,  or  duration  of  a  family  ;  the  period  of  the  con- 
tinuance of  a  family  in  being ;  the  age  from  Adam  to 
Noah  ;  the  age  from  Noah  to  Abraham  ;  the  age  from 
Abraham  to  Christ ;  the  age  from  the  first  advent  of 
Christ  to  the  second,  to  the  millennial  age  ;  to  the  ages, 
taken  separately,  succeeding  ;  and  emphatically,  to  "  the 
age  of  the  Messiah." 

Oulom  occurs  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  only  as  a 
noun  :  the  adverbial  form  ^\for  ever^^  and  the  adjective 
"  everlasting^^  ought  never  to  have  been  applied  to  it, 
excepting  when  it  had  an  undoubted  reference  to  the  asre 
or  kingdom  of  the  Messiah ;  which  we  learn  from  other 
sources  will  have  no  end.  Oulotn  occurs  in  some  of  its 
forms  more  than  three  hundred  times  in  the  0.  T.,  and 
in  more  than  two  hundred  and  fifty  cases  the  Septuagint 
have  translated  it  by  the  Greek  word  aion  ;  in  ninety- 
two  cases  they  have  used  the  adjective  aionios  as  being 
applicable  to  it.  In  these  ninety-two  cases  it  will  gene- 
rally admit  of  the  English  term  everlasting^  but  only  be- 
cause they  refer  to  the  age  of  the  Messiah ;  in  the  other 
places  they  refer  to  the  mountains ;  the  Levitical  sta- 
tutes ;  priesthood ;  rites ;  covenant ;  landmarks  ;  waste 
places  ;  (fee. ;  so  that  the  words  aion^  and  aionios^  never 
mean  everlasting  in  themselves ;  and  as  referring  to  the 
whole  period  embraced  in  the  era,  they  will  only  bear 
such  construction  w^hen  they  refer  to  an  age  which  we 
are  taught  in  unambiguous  terms,  will  never  have  an 
end ;  and  even  then  will  bear  to  be  more  consistently 
translated  as  "  pertaining  to  the  age  of  the  Messiah ;" 
which  paraphrase  is  rendered  necessary,  because  we,  like 


264  BIBLE   VS.  TRADITION. 

the  ancient  Hebrews,  have  no  adjective  expressive  of  its 
meaningv  An  intelligent  writer,  after  deprecating  the 
"  unfixed  practice"  of  the  translators  in  rendering  the 
terms  aio7i  and  aionios — whereby  they  have  obscured  so 
many  passages — observes,  "  Most  fully  may  it  be  grant- 
ed that  in  the  apostolic  axiom — *  The  gift  of  God  is 
eternal  laionios']  life,'  there  is  included — infinite,  or  never 
ending  existence.  But  our  persuasion  of  this  fact  must 
not  be  made  to  hinge  on  the  native  or  independent  force 
of  the  adjective  [aionios~\  there  employed  ;  but  upon  the 
evident  intention  of  the  writer,  as  illustrated  and  con- 
firmed by  other  means."  That  the  translators  of  the 
Septuagint  did  not  understand  the  terms  aion  and  aion- 
ioSj  as  comprehending  unlimited  duration,  is  evident  from 
the  manner  in  which  they  have  expressed  a  period  be- 
yond  what  was  embraced  in  these  terms.  Examples : 
Exo.  15:  18,  "The  Lord  shall  reign  {Ic-ovlum  vaed)  for 
ever,"  is  expressed  in  Greek  by  "  The  Lord  shall  reign 
{to7t  aionaj  kai  ep*  aiona,  kai  eti)  from  age  to  age  and 
further y  It  may  be  questioned  whether  the  Hebrew 
should  not  be  translated  "  for  the  age  and  onivard ;'' 
thus  demonstrating  that  the  "  for  ever"  simply,  as  equal 
to  oulorti^  does  not  include  the  idea  of  everlasting  dura- 
tion. Dan.  12:3,  "  They  that  turn  many  to  righteous- 
ness, (shall  shine)  as  the  stars  (adai-ad)  for  ever  and 
ever  :"  the  Septuagint  translates,  eis  tous  aionas,  kai  eti,) 
"through  the  ages,  and  further.'*^  Mic.  4:5,"  We  will 
walk  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  our  God  (adai-ad)  for  ever 
and  ever;"  the  Septuagint  translates  "through  the  age, 
and  beyond  ity 

THE    LIMFTED    USE   OF    OULOM. 

Examples  from  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  : — Jonah  2  :  6, 
"  The  earth  with  her  bars  w^as  about  me  (leoulom)  for 
EVER."  Although  this  "  for  ever"  only  embraced  a  pe- 
riod of  three  days  and  three  nights,  yet  it  extends  through- 
out the  w^hole  of  that  period.  There  was  no  part  of  the 
age  specified  in  which  *  the  earth  with  her  bars'  were 
not  about  Jonah. 

Exo.  40  :  15,  "  And  thou  shalt  anoint  them. ...that  they 
may  minister  to  me  in  the  priest's  oflSce  :  for  their  anoint- 
ing shall  surely  be  an  everlasting  priesthood,  throughout 


THE    LIMITED   USE    OF    OULOM,  265 

their  generations.''''  Kum.  25  :  13,  "  Wherefore  say  be- 
hold I  give  unto  (Phineas)  my  covenant  of  peace.  And 
he  shall  have  it,  and  his  seed  after  him,  even  the  cove- 
nant of  (i92^/<5??2)  an  everlasting  priesthood:  because  he 
was  zealous  for  his  God."  Yet  the  family  of  Phineas, 
was  entirely  deprived  of  the  priesthood  within  four  hun- 
dred years ;  for  when  the  sons  of  Eli  transgressed  the 
covenant  by  profaning  it,  God  cut  oiF  this  family  and 
transferred  the  priesthood  to  the  house  of  Ithamar. — 
Will  the  reader  consult  1  Sam.  2:  12-17,  and  27  to  end ; 
3  :  1 1^14 ;  22  :  9-20  ;  1  Kings  2  :  27,  35.  No  part  of 
the  Aaronic  priesthood  was  designed  to  be  perpetual 
though  called  oulom :  but  (Heb.  9  :  10)  were  ^'imposed 
en  them  until  the  time  of  reformation."  See  also  Heb, 
7:  12-28. 

Deut.  15:  17^  Exo.  21:6,  Of  the  servant  that  loved 
his  master's  service,  and  refused  to  leave,  it  is  said, 
"  Then  shalt  thou  take  an  awl,  and  thrust  it  through  his 
ear  unto  the  door,  and  he  shall  be  thy  servant  (leoitlom) 
far  every  Compare  Phile.  15  v,  '^  He  depai'ted  for  a 
season,  that  thou  shouldst  receive  him  {aionion)  for  ever," 
with  Job  3:19.  Both  these  ^*  for  evers"  mean  the  age 
or  period  of  their  lives,  as  clearly  appears  in  I  Sam.  1  : 
22,  "  I  will  bring  him  that  he  may  appear  before  the 
Lord,  and  there  abide  (le-oulom)  for  ever^  11  v,  28  v,  "As 
long  as  he  liveth  he  shall  be  lent  to  the  Lord."  "  All 
the  days  of  his  life."  2  Kings  5  :  27,  "  The  leprosy  of 
Naaman  shall  cleave  unto  thee  and  to  thy  seed  {le- oulom) 
for  ever?''  1  Ki.  9  :  3,  "  I  have  hallow^  this  house, 
which  thou  hast  built,  to  put  my  name  there  {le  oulom) 
for  ever  ;  and  my  eyes  aiad  my  heart  shall  be  there  {Jcol 
hayomeen)  all  the  days."  Yet  that  temple  was  destroy- 
ed long  since.  Jer.  17  :  4,  "  I  will  cause  thee  to  serve 
thine  enemies  in  the  land  which  thou  knowest  not :  for  ye 
have  kindled  a  fire  in  mine  anger,  which  shall  burn  (le- 
oulom)for  everP  Yet  the  time  predicted  was  only  seventy 
years,  in  which  time  God  brought  them  back  again  to 
their  own  land. 

Isa.  32  :  14,  15,  "  The  forts  and  towers  shall  be  dens 
{leoulom)  for  ever,  a  joy  of  wild  asses,  a  pasture  of 
flocks ;  uNTif.  the  spirit  be  poured  upon  us  from  on  high, 
:and  the  wilderness  be  a  fruitful  field."  Here  the  "/<?r 
ever''''  is  clearly  bounded  by  another  period. 


266  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITIO!^. 

"We  have  given  enough  of  examples  to  prove  that  ou- 
lorn  does  not  mean  everlasting.  We  give  an  example  ot 
its  use  as  applying  to  the  age  of  the  Messiah.  Isa.  9  : 
6,  "  Unto  us  a  child  is  born,  unto  us  a  son  is  given ;  and 
the  government  shall  be  upon  his  shoulder  :  and  his  name 
shall  be  called  Wonderful,  Counsellor,  The  Mighty  God, 
The  Father  of  oulom^  The  Prince  of  Peace."  The  Sep- 
tuagint  translates  the  clause  in  Italics — which  we  affirm 
means  the  Father,  Author  or  Originator  of  the  A^q — ^by 
pater  mellontes  aionos,  "  The  Father  of  the  coming  age." 
And  only  when  ouiom  and  aion  refer  to  this  age  of  the 
Messiah  wiD  they  bear  to  be  translated  for  ever ;  and 
then  only  because  the  age  or  reign  of  the  Messiah  will 
have  no  end,  and  not  from  the  import  of  the  words  them- 
selves. 

INSTANCES    OP    THE   LIMITED     MEANING    OF    OULOM,    TRANSLA- 
TED   *  FOR    EVER,'  *  EVERLASTING,'    ^  PERPETUAL,' 
*  CONTINUAL,'  &C. 

Gen.  17:  8;  48:  4;  Ex.  12:14,  17;  14:  13;  27:20, 
21;  28:43;  30:21;  32:13;  Lev.  6  :  18  ;  7:34,36; 
10 :  9,  15  ;  16  :  31,  34 ;  19  :  7  ;  23  :  14,  31,  41 ;  24  :  3, 8  ; 
25:23,  30,  46;  Num.  10:  8;  15:15;  18:8,  11,  19,  23; 
19:10;Deut.  18:5;  28:46;  29:29;  Jos.  4:  7;  8: 
12;  14:9;  1  Sam.  2:  30;  32  :  35  ;  3  :  13,  14 ;  20:15, 
23,  42 ;  2  Sam.  2 :  26  ;  7  :  13,  16,  17, 24,  25,  29 ;  12 :  10  ; 
1  Kings  1:31;  2  :  23  ;  9  :  3,5 ;  8  :  13 ;  10  :  9 ;  2  Kings 
17:37;  21:7;  1  Chr.  15  :  2 ;  17:12,14,22,27;  22: 
10;  23:  13,25;  28:  4,  7,  8;  2  Chr.  2:4;  7:  16;  9:8; 
10:7;  13:5;  20  :  7 ;  21:7;  30  :  8 ;  33  :  4,  7 ;  Ezr.  9  : 
12 ;  Ne.  2 :  3  ;  13:1;  Job  4  :  20  ;  19  :  24  ;  36  :  7;  Ps. 
13:1;  22  :  26  ;  24  :  7,  9  ;  48  :  8,  9,  U  ;  61  :  4,  7 ;  68 : 
16;  74:  1,  10;  77:7,8;  79  :  5  ;  81:  15;  89:46;  103: 
9;  106:31;  125:1;  132:12,14;  148:6;  Pro.  12: 
19  ;  Ecc.  9:6;  Isa.  13  :  20  ;  25  :  2  ;  30  :  8  ;  62:  6  ;  Jen 
3:5;  7:7;  17:4,25;  20:  11;  25:5;  36:  6,  19;  49: 
33  ;  50 :  39 ;  51  :  62  .  La.  5  :  20 ;  Eze.  28  :  19  ;  Dan.  2  : 
4  ;  3:9;  5:10;  6  :  6,  21  ;  Joel  3  :  20  ;  ML  2:  9  ;  Zee. 
2:9;  Isa.  34:  10,  17;  Lev.  3:17;  24:9;  Num.19: 
21  ;  28  :  31 ;  29  :  16,  19,  22,  25,  28,  31,  34,  38 ;  2  Sam. 
9:7,10;  1  Ki.  23  :  31 ;  2  Chr.  7  :  16;  Ps.9:6;  40: 
16  ;  50  :  8  ;  52  :  1 ;  72  :  15;  74 :  3  ;  78 :  66  ;  109  :  16 ; 


THE    END   OF   "  FOR   EVER."  267 

Jer.  5:22;  23:40;  25:9,12;  51:39,57;  Eze.  46 : 
14,  15  ;  Hos.  12:  6;  and  Hab.  3  :  6.  There  are  more 
than  one  hundred  and  ninety  examples  of  the  limitation 
of  "/oT-  every  A  word  that  must  have  a  limited  signifi- 
cation,  in  so  many  cases,  can  never  mean  ^for  ever"*  in 
the  sense  of  unending. 

EXAMINATION   OF    AION. 

Aion  occurs  one  hundred  and  four  times  in  the  N.  T. 
Some  derive  it  from  ae%  always  ;  and  on^  passing  or  be- 
ing; an  era  always  passing.  It  is  translated  for  ever^ 
twenty-eight  times  ;  ever^  one  ;  evermore^  three  times  ; 
for  ever  and  ever^  twenty-two  times  ;  thirteen  of  which 
occur  in  Eevelation ;  with  a  negative,  never ^  eight  times ; 
eternal  twice :  course  once ;  ages  twice ;  world  thirty-one 
times  ;  before  the  world  began  three  times  ;  beginning  of 
the  world  twice ;  while  the  world  standeth^  twice  ;  and 
world  without  end  once ;  thirteen  different  meanings  for 
a  word  which  we  believe  should  always  be  translated 
*  AGE.'  In  every  case  where  it  occurs  it  will  bear  this 
translation  ;  and  the  reason  why  it  appears  in  so  many 
places  to  express  an  unlimited  duration,  is  simply  because 
it  refers  to  the  oulom^  or  aion^  or  age^  throughout  which 
Jesus  Christ  shall  reign ;  which  age  will  have  no  end. 
The  end  of  aion  is  often  spoken  of;  and  two  distinct 
aions  are  often  contrasted,  the  one  to  begin  where  the 
other  ends. 

THE    END    OF    "  FOR    EVER." 

Startle  not,  gentle  reader,  at  the  caption  of  this 
article  ;  for  \i.  aion^  of  itself,  carries  the  meaning  of  "/or 
ever,"  in  one  place,  it  can  in  no  place  have  a  meaning 
that  contradicts  it.  Our  translators  have  endeavored  to 
disentangle  themselves  from  this  difficulty,  by  translating 
aion  by  "  world^^-  which  they  have  done  no  less  than 
thirty-one  times.  But  "  aion'''*  never  means  the  material 
world.  The  proper  Greek  word  for  world  is  "  kosmos,^^ 
which  occurs  one  hundred  and  eighty-eight  times  in  the 
New  Testament ;  and  in  one  hundred  and  eighty-seven 
places  is  correctly  translated  world  ;  but  in  1  Pet.  3  :  3, 
it  is   translated  "  adorning."     From   thus  confounding 


268  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

the  two  words,  aion  and  kosmos^  many  have  supposed 
that  there  is  another  kosmoSj  or  world,  that  is  now^  and 
will  be,  the  residence  of  the  saints.  We  give  a  few  ex- 
amples of  the  end  of  aion^  or  "  eternity  ;"  we  shall 
translate  it  "  a^e,"  but  the  reader  can  supplant  it  by 
the  term  "  for  ever^^  or  "  eternity^''  and  be  consistent 
and  uniform. 

Mat.  13  :  39,  40,  "  The  harvest  is  sunteleia  tou  aionoSj 
the  end  of  the  age  ;  and  the  reapers  are  the  angels.  -45, 
therefore,  the  weeds  are  gathered  together,  and  burned 
in  the  fire  ;  so  will  it  be  in  sunteleia  tou  aionos  toutou, 
the  END  of  this  age.''^  49  v.  "  So  will  it  be  in  sunteleia 
tou  aionos,  the  end  of  the  age." 

Mat.  24  :  3,  "  Tell  us,  when  will  this  happen  ?  And 
what  will  be  the  sign  of  thy  coming  ?  And  of  the  sun- 
teleias  tou  aionos,  the  end  of  the  age?''  The  mistransla- 
tion of  this,  and  kindred  passages,  has  led  many  to 
believe,  that  the  material  world  is  to  be  destroyed,  im- 
mediately on  the  reappearing  of  Christ  ;  but  no  such 
conclusion  is  warranted  from  any  passage  of  scripture. 
The  apostles  understood  that  the  next  age,  (our  present,) 
would  continue  till  Christ  should  come  again,  and  to  this 
age  the  last  two  questions  refer. 

Mat.  28  :  20,  "  And  lo,  I  am  with  you  [ye  apostles] 
pasas  tas  hemeras,  all  the  days,  heos  tees  sunteleias  tou 
aionos,  until  the  end  of  the  age?''  This  evidently  refers 
to  the  remaining  days  of  that  age,  which  ended  with  the 
apostles.     Paul   designates   these   days,   in   Heb.  1:    1, 

"  God hath  in  these  last  days,  spoken  to  us  by  a 

Son,  whom  he  has  constituted  heir  of  all  things  ;  on 
w^hose  account  also  he  disposed  the  tous  aionas,  the 
ages."  And  John  also,  1st  Epistle  1  :  18,  "  Little  child- 
ren, it  is  the  last  time  ....  even  now  are  there  many 
Anti-Christs,  whereby  we  know  that  it  is  the  last  timey 
In  a  few  years  from  that  time,  that  age,  or  everlasting, 
ended  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  abolition 
of  the  temple  service.  Heb.  9 :  25,  "Nor  yet  that  he 
should  ofter  himself  often  ....  For  then  must  he  often 
have  suffered  since  the  foundation  of  the  world,  {kos- 
rnos  ;)  but  now  once,  in  the  sunteleia  ton  aionon,  end  of 
the  ages,  he  hath  appeared  to  abolish  sin  offering,  by  the 
sacrifice  of  iiimself."  Many  ages,  or  "/or  evers,^^  had 
passed  away  prior  to  the  sacrifice  of  the  essential  being 


EVERLASTINGS   HAVE   PASSED   AWAY.  269 

of  Jesus  Christ  himself.  1  Cor.  10  :  11,"  And  all  these 
things  happened  unto  them  for  examples,  and  they  were 
written  for  our  admonition,  upon  whom  ta  tele  ton  aionon, 
the  ends  of  the  ages  are  come." 

MANY    "  everlastings"    HAVE    PASSED    AWAY  ! 

liuke  1  :  70,  "  As  he  spake  by  the  mouth  of  his  holy 
ones,  who  have  prophesied  of  him,  apo  aionoSj  since  the 
age^^  [began.]  Acts  3:21,  "  Whom  the  heavens  must 
retain  until  the  times  of  the  restoring  of  all  things  that 
God  hath  spoken  of  by  the  mouth  of  his  holy  prophets^ 
a'po  aionos^  since  the  age^''  [began.]  Acts  15 :  18, 
"  Known  unto  God  are  all  his  works,  apo  aionos^  since 
the  age''''  [began.]  Before,  we  had  the  end  of  eternity  ; 
now,  we  have  the  beginning  of  an  age,  or  everlasting, 
that  has  passed  away  !  Eph.  3  :  9,  "  And  to  show 
clearly,  to  all,  what  is  the  dispensation  of  the  then  un- 
revealed  doctrine,  which  was  hidden  apo  ton  aionon^ 
from  the  ages  by  God,  who  created  all  things,  on  ac- 
count of  Jesus  Christ  .  .  .  .  "  11  v.  "  According  to  the 
arrangement  ton  aionon-j  of  the  ages,  which  he  moulded 
in  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord."  Col.  1  :  26,  "  The  unrevealed 
word,  which  was  hidden  apo  ton  aio?ion,  from  ages^  and 
from  generations,  but  now  is  made  manifest  to  his  saints." 
Eph.  2:7,  "  That  in  tois  aionsi^  the  ages  to  come,  he 
may  show  the  overflowing  riches  of  his  favor."  Heb. 
11:  3,  "  By  faith  we  understand  that  tous  aionas,  the 
ages,  were  produced  by  the  command  of  God  ;  so  that 
things  seen  originated  from  those  that  are  not  seen." 

The  things  "  hoped  for,"  and  the  things  "  not  seen 
as  yet,"  were  clearly  the  promises  that  God  had  made 
respecting  the  ages,  the  period  of  Christ's  first  coming 
and  sacrifice,  and  the  period  of  his  second  coming  to 
reign  in  his  kingdom.  Abel  believed  in  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ,  and  ofiered  a  lamb  as  its  symbol.  Noah  believed 
in  things  "  unseen  as  yet,"  "  for  God  had  not  caused  it 
to  rain  upon  the  earth  ;"  (Gen.  2  :  5.)  Yet  when  God 
threatened  to  rain  upon  the  earth  for  forty  days,  he  be- 
Ueved,  and  built  tha^ark.  Abraham  saw  by  faith  the 
fulfilment  of  the  promises  afar  off,  and  embraced  them, 
and  confessed  that  during  his  fife-time,  he  was  only  a 
stranger  in  his  own  land^  that  very  land  that  he  expected 


270  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

to  inherit  by  being  raised  again  from  the  dead.  By 
faith  Moses  "  endured  as  seeing  him,"  (Christ,)  that  at 
that  time  was  "  unseen ;"  that  is,  "  did  not  then  ap- 
pear." To  us  it  is  clear,  that  the  reference  in  Heb.  11  : 
3,  is  not  to  the  material  worlds,  but  to  the  ages  prophe- 
sied of  which  were  comprehended  by  faith,  and  the 
elders  obtained  a  good  testimony  by  believing  it :  and  if 
not  here,  then  no  where  does  aion  mean  the  material 
world.  1  Cor.  2:6,  "  However  we  speak  wisdom 
among  the  perfect  :  but  not  the  wisdom  tou  aionos  tou- 
ton,  of  this  age,  nor  of  the  rulers  tou  aionos  toutou,  of 
this  age,  which  are  coming  to  nothing.  For  we  speak 
the  wisdom  of  God,  which  was  hidden  in  an  unrevealed 
doctrine  ;  but  which  God  predetermined,  j^ro  ton  aionon, 
before  the  ages,  (or  Jewish  jubilees,)  should  be  spoken  to 
our  glory.  Which  wisdom  none  of  the  rulers  tou  aionos 
toutou,  of  this  age,  knew  :  for  if  they  had  known  it,  they 
would  not  have  crucified  the  glorious  Lord."  Similar 
expressions  likewise  occur  in  2  Cor.  4:4;  Eph.  6  :    12 

1  Tim.  6 :  17  ;  2  Tim.  4 :  10  :  Tit.  2  :  12  :  Mat.  13  :  22 
Mark  4:19;  Luke  16  :  8 ;  Eom.  12:2;  1  Cor.  1  :  20 

2  :  6,  8  ;  3  :  18. 

TWO    LIMITED    ETERNITIES   ARE    CONTRASTED    WITH   EACH 

OTHER,    ONE    OF    WHICH   TERMINATES    BEFORE 

THE    BEGINNING   OF    THE   OTHER. 

The  reader  will  please  compare  the  common  version 
with  the  translation  we  give,  and  if  he  be  very  much 
imbued  with  the  notion  that  aion  must  sometimes  mean 
eternity,  he  can  substitute  eternity  where  we  put  age. 
Mat.  12  :  32,  "  For  whosoever  shall  inveigh  against  the 
Son  of  Man  may  obtain  pardon  ;  but  whosoever  shall 
speak  against  the  Consecrated  Spirit,  shall  never  be 
pardoned,  neither  en  toutou  to  aioni,  in  this  age,  oute, 
neither,  en  to  mellonti,  in  the  coming  [age]  ;"  that  is, 
neither  in  the  age  Christ  spake,  nor  in  the  succeeding 
age.  Eph.  1  :  21,  God  hath  set  Christ  "  at  his  own 
right  hand  ....  far  above  all  principaUties,  ....  and 
every  name  that  is  named  ;  not  only  en  to  aioni  toutou, 
in  THIS  age  ;  but  also,  en  to  mellonti,  in  the  coming 
[age.]"  Mark  10  :  30,  "  But  he  shall  receive  a  hundred 
fold,  7itin  en  to  kairo  toutou,   now  in  this  tiine^   houses 


TWO    LIMITED   ETERNITIES.  271 

and  brethren  ....  with  persecutions  ;  and  en  to  aioni, 
in  the  age  to  come  zoen  aionion,  the  life  pertaining  to 
the  age."  Luke  18:  30,  is  parallel  Luke  20:  34, 
*''  Tfee  children  tmi^  aionos  toutou^  of  this  age^  marry  and 
are  given  in  marriage ;  but  those  who  shall  be  esteemed 
worthy  tou  aionos  ekeinou^  of  that  age^  and  the  resurrec- 
tion, tes  ek  nekron^  that  one  out  from  among  the  dead, 
neither  marry,  nor  are  given  in  marriage,  neither  can 
they  die  any  more."  In  these  passages,  the  present  age 
or  eternity,  is  limited  to  the  present  life,  as  distinguished 
from  another  age,  to  commence  when  Christ  shall  raise 
the  righteous  dead.  The  first  age  is  not  everlasting, 
and  the  second  may  be  included  in  the  thousand  years 
reign  of  Christ  over  the  nations,  prior  to  the  thorough 
renovation  'of  the  earth,  the  entire  destruction  of  all  the 
wicked,  and  the  introduction  of  glorious  ages  beyond,  in 
which  there  will  be  no  more  sin  nor  sinners,  but  aM  tlaat 
then  exist  will  be  holy  and  happy. 

There  are  sixteen  cases,  in  which  aion  is  employed  in 
ascriptions  of  praise  to  God*  In  the  most  emphatic  of 
these  expressions  it  will  bear  the  construction,  through- 
out the  ages  of  ages ;  and  does  not  imply  eternity  in  any 
other  manner  than  in  not  hmiting  the  number  of  the 
ages,  and  in  many  places  strict  grammatical  rules  would 
compel  these  phrases  to  be  construed,  "  untU  the  a^es 
of  ages^'^  or  consummation  of  all  things.  In  five 
cases  where  it  is  translated  "  who  liveth  for  ever  and 
ever,"  it  may  be  construed  in  the  same  manner.  Indeed, 
there  is  no  word  that  can  be  used  in  the  plural^  that  of 
iteelf  canbe  made  to  express  eternity.  Professor  Stuart 
produces  other  words  that  are  used  in  the  plural.  But 
most  unfortunately  for  his  argument,  all  the  words  which 
he  has  adduced,  are  used  in  the  plural  because  they 
designate  more  than  one.  His  examples  are,  Ehohim^ 
sometimes  translated  God,  gods,  rulers,  angels,  magis- 
trates ;  but  is  a  regular  plural  word ;  while  the  self- 
existent  God  is  called  Jehovah  Elohim  ;  which  may  be 
understood  Jehovah  of  the  Elohim  : — tabernacles,  seas, 
and  in  Greek^  heavens  and  sabbaths.  Yet  there  re- 
maineth  another  sabbath  for  the  people  of  God  ;  and 
Peter  designates  three  distinct  heavens,  and  we  have  a 
more  perfect  tabernacle. 


272  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION, 


EXAMINATION   OF    AIONIOB^. 


The  adjective  aionios  cannot  be  made  to  express  more 
than  the  noun  aion  from  which  it  is  derived.  Holy  does 
not  express  more  than  hoUness^  nor  does  lovely  than  love. 
"When  we  read  that  God  is  hght,  and  God  is  love,  it  ex- 
presses the  idea  more  emphatically  than  if  we  had  read 
that  God  was  luminous,  or  God  was  lovely.  So  if  aicm 
mean  an  age,  aionios  means  pertaining  to  the  age,  or 
throughout  the  age,  and  does  not  express  everlasting- 
otherwise  than  as  couDected  with  an  age,  which  we  are 
taught  in  other  and  unambiguous  language^  will  be  ever- 
lasting. The  phrase,  "  shall  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God," 
expresses  an  everlasting  inheritance,  but  not  from  the 
force  of  any  of  the  terms  employed,  but  because  other 
phrases  teach  us  that  this  kingdom  will  have  no  end. 

Aionios  occurs  seventy-one  times  in  the  N.  T. ;  forty- 
four  of  these  refer  to  the  life  of  the  righteous,  and  as  this 
life  is  never  to  end^  so  these  places  will  bear  the  meaning 
of  everlasting  without  any  apparent  straining  of  lai>- 
guage  ;  bat  enough  of  the  others  are  left  to  show  that 
aionios  does  not  of  itself  imply  everlasting; 

LIMITED    MEANING    OF    AIONIOS. 

2  Tim.  1  :  9,  "  Who  hath  saved  us.... according  to  his 
own  purpose  and  grace,  which  was  given  us  in  Christ 
Jesus,  pro  chronon  aionion^  before  the  world  began.''' 
But  how  long  before  ?  Paul  tells  us  that  the  glad  tid- 
ings of  the  kingdom,  and  the  covenant  of  the  age  were 
preached  unto  Abraham  four  hundred  and  thirty  years 
before  the  period  alluded  to  :  and  before  aionion  times^ 
which  is  literal,  and  means  that  ^Hncorrvptibility''''  was 
included  4n  the  promise  that  was  made  to  Abraham, 
four  hundred  and  thirty  years,  before  the  establishment 
of  the  Jewish  jubilees  ;  but  was  first  illustrated  by  the 
resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead  with  an  incor- 
ruptible nature.  Tit.  1:2,  "  In  hope  of  aionios  Fife, 
which  God,  who  cannot  lie,  promised />?'<9c/^ro^^o?^  azon- 
ion'''  [not]  before  the  tvorldijcosmos)  began^but  before  the 
ages  of  the  Mosaic  law  ;  ^'  but  hath  in  due  times  mani- 
fested [the  truth  of]  his  word  through  preaching"  [Jesus 


LIMITED    MEANING   OF   AIONIOS.  273 

and  the  resurrection].  Eora.  16:  25,...."  And  the  preach- 
ing of  Jesus  Christ,  according  to  the  revelation  of  the 
mystery,  which  was  kept  secret  chronois  aioniois^  during 
the  [ages  of  the  law],  hut  is  now  made  manifest,"  &c. 
Here  are  three  examples  of  the  adjective  aionios,  having 
reference  to  the  past  and  limited  time.  When  the  Sa- 
vior intended  to  express  a  period,  before  the  beginning  of 
the  world,  he  uses  this  language,  in  John  17 :  5,  "  And 
now,  O  Father,  glorify  thou  me  with  thine  own  self  with 
the  glory  which  I  had  with  thee  pro  ton  ton  kosmon 
einaij  before  this  world  was."  Observe,  it  is  /cosmos  and 
not  aionios. 

Lu.  16:9,"  And  I  also  say  to  you :  make  to  your- 
selves friends,  with  this  deceitful  mammon  ;  so  that  when 
it  is  finished,  they  may  receive  you  into  their  aionious 
skenaSj  tents  of  this  age."  As  though  he  said,  make  the 
best  use  of  another's  riches,  that  those  whom  you  favor 
may  take  you  to  their  tents  for  the  present,  for  God  will 
not  entrust  you  with  the  true  and  enduring  riches. — 
Surely  few  will  contend  that  the  tents  of  the  wicked  are 
"  everlasting  :"  the  very  expression  and  contrast  shews 
that  these  "  tents^^  were  to  exist  but  a  short  time. 

Philemon  15,  "  For  this  reason,  perhaps,  he  {Onesimus) 
was  separated  from  thee  for  a  little  while,  that  thou 
mightest  possess  him  aionion,  for  ever^^  say  our  trans- 
lators ;  and  while  we  commend  their  consistency  we  can- 
not commend  their  judgment.  It  evidently  means  dur- 
ing the  period  or  age  of  his  natural  life.  If  our  transla- 
tors had  uniformly  used  the  words  everlasting  ox  forever 
for  aion  and  aionios,  then  every  reader  would  have  in- 
stantly perceived  that  these  terms  could  not  be  the  true 
representatives  of  the  Greek  words. 

Eev.  14:6,"  And  I  saw  another  angel  flying  in  the 
midst  of  heaven,  having  the  euaggelion  aionion,  the  gos- 
pel of  the  [millennial]  age,  to  preach  unto  them  that  dwell 
on  the  earth,  to  every  nation,  and  kindred,  and  tongue, 
and  people,  saying  with  a  loud  voice,  Fear  God  and 
give  glory  to  him  for  the  hour  of  his  judgment  is  come." 
As  the  gospel  of  the  present  age  contains  the  glad  tid- 
ings of  the  kingdom,  and  the  offer  of  pardon  and  life  to 
the  unconverted,  so  the  gospel  of  the  angel  is  the  offer  of 
pardon  to  the  unconverted  prior  to  the  total  destruction 
of  all  the  wicked.     It  will  not  be  contended  that  those 


274  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

who  are  already  "  horn  agairC  in  the  kingdom,  by  a  re- 
surrection from  the  dead,  need  the  proclamation  of  par- 
don ;  and  there  will  be  no  unconverted  persons  in  exis- 
tence ofter  the  millennial  period ;  and  so  it  is  evident 
that  the  proclamation  of  aionios  gospel  must  terminate 
with  the  termination  of  the  unconverted ;  and  aionios 
therefore  expresses  here  a  limited  duration. 

2  Cor.  4  :  17,  ''  For  our  light  afflictions  which  are  mo- 
mentary, kath  huperbolen  eis  huperholen  aionion  baros 
doxes  hater gazetai  hemin^  prepareth  us  mightily  for  a 
burden  of  glory, excessively  exuberant  beyond  the  glory 
of  the  age,"  or  the  age-lasting  glory  ;  or,  as  in  the  com- 
mon version,  the  "  ettrnaV  glory.  We  pretend  not  to  be 
able  to  transfuse  into  the  English  language  the  full  energy 
of  Paul's  Greek  :  it  is  enough  for  our  argument  that  it 
expresses  something  exceedingly  intensive  beyond  what 
is  expressed  by  the  phrase  aionion  baros  doxes ^  a  burden 
of  glory  pertaining  to  the  [millennial]  age.  The  aionia 
of  the  18th  V.  expresses  an  enduring  period,  but  here  is  a 
period  cast  be3-ond  it,  and  still  another  period  cast  be- 
yond that.  Perhaps  Paul  endeavored  to  express  the 
eternity  of  the  glory  by  positive  expressions  rather  than 
the  usual  negative  ones,  and  he  evidently  considers  that 
aionios  could  not  do  it. 

RESULTS  OF   THE    EXAMINATION    OF    "  AIOn"    AND 
"  AIONIOS." 

The  result  of  our  examination  stands  thus :  The  noun 
aio7i  ALWAYS  expresses  a  limited  period  ;  and  the  adjec- 
tive aionios  cannot  be  proved,  in  any  passage,  to  express 
an  unlimited  period  by  itself ;  and  according  to  the  ana- 
logy of  all  languages,  no  adjective  expresses  more  than 
th^  noun  from  which  it  is  derived  ;  and,  therefore,  ana- 
logy and  facts  show,  that  the  adjective  is  limited  within 
the  range  of  the  noun.  And,  further,  as  aionios  has  an 
undoubted  limited  meaning  in  the  passages  we  have 
quoted,  in  the  Saptuagint,  and  in  classic  usage,  so  we 
conclude  that  it  has  a  limited  meaning  in  every  passage 
w^here  it  occurs.  While  most  critics  concede  that  awn 
Jias  a  limited  meaning,  yet  they  suppose  that  the  repeti- 
tion of  aion  expresses  eternity.  We  reply,  that  if  the 
jingle  term  be  hmited,  ther^  is  no  amount  of  repetition 


BEARING   OF   THE    ARGUMENT.  275 

can  make  it  unlimited.      The  repetitions  are  merely 
Hebrew  Greek  idioms,  used  for  emphasis. 

THE   BEARING    OF   THE   ARGUMENT    UPON   THOSE   TEXTS   THAT 
ARE    SUPPOSED    TO    TEACH    ENDLESS    MISERY. 

We  have  elsewhere  shown,  that  the  scriptures  teach 
plainly,  unequivocally,  repeatedly,  and  in  the  most 
forcible  and  varied  language,  that  the  fearful  doom  of 
the  impenitent  sinner  is  death  !  in  the  sense  of  privation 
of  life,  or  extinction  of  being  ;  and,  therefore,  there  is  no 
amount  of  the  clearest  testimony^  could  possibly  teach 
the  opposite  doctrine.  It  might  indeed  teach,  were  it 
to  be  found,  that  all  the  testimony  was  contradictory 
and  unworthy  of  credit ;  and  teaching  yea  and  nay  of 
the  same  doctrine,  we  might  be  fully  justified  in  rending 
our  Bibles  to  pieces,  and  scattering  them  to  the  winds  of 
heaven,  as  unworthy  of  the  slightest  regard  !  But, 
blessed  be  God,  the  scriptures  do  not  teach  yea  and  nay 
of  the  same  doctrine,  but  are  all  Fea  and -4me^t,  in  Christ 
Jesus.  All  the  texts  that  are  adduced,  as  being  sup- 
posed to  teach  that  the  wicked  will  have  endless  hfe  m 
misery,  are  only  supposed  to  do  so,  by  forcing  an  un- 
limited construction  upon  some  form  of  the  word  aion, 
and  upon  the  assumption,  without  the  slightest  vestige 
of  sound  argument,  that  every  man  has  an  "  immortal^ 
never-dying  souiy  But  for  this  unwarranted  assump- 
tion, every  child  in  understanding,  would  have  given  to 
the  simple  and  unequivocal  expressions  of  life  and  deaths 
— as  marking  the  opposite  states  of  the  righteous  and 
the  wicked^ — their  plain  and  obvious  import.  And  it  is 
charging  God  with  folly,  to  say,  he  uses  the  term  death, 
"  The  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die,"  to  express  the  idea 
that  the  soul  should  live  for  ever  in  misery !  We  might 
call  upon  theologians  to  produce  a  single  passage  of 
scripture,  upon  which  they  could  found  even  a  plausible 
argument,  irrespective  of  the  assumption  of  natural  im- 
mortality, and  the  attachment  of  an  w^zlimited  meaning 
to  the  limited  word,  aion^ — and  so,  after  what  precedes, 
we  might  pass  by  every  text  that  contains  aion^  till  the 
impracticable  task  was  accomplished — that  would  show 
this  word  always,  or  even  ever,  meant  of  itself,  an  endless 
duration.     But  that  the  reader  may  be  entirely  disabused 


276  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

of  this  most  horrible  do<jtrine,  which  is  so  derogatory  to 
the  character  of  God,  and  conflicts  so  terribly  with 
every  principle  of  justice  and  humanity,  which  God  has 
implanted  in  the  human  mind,  and  that  turns  the  truth 
of  God  into  fables,  we  shall,  as  briefly  as  may  be,  ex- 
amine further  all  the  texts.  For  this  end,  we  lay  them 
all  before  the  reader,  premising  however,  that  the  aion 
is  not  the  onhj  word  that  is  used  out  of  its  ordinary 
meaning,  but  also  the  word  eis. 

TEXTS   THAT   ARE    SUPPOSED   TO    TEACH    EVERLASTING 
MISERY. 

Lest  we  might  be  suspected  of  keeping  back,  we  shall 
bring  forward  all  those  texts  containing  aion^  that  are 
enumerated  by  Professor  Stuart,  who  has  labored  most 
indefatigably  to  prop  up  the  tottering  Dagon  of  "  eternal 
torments."  Presuming  our  readers  to  be  famihar  with 
the  common  version,  we  shall  put  such  construction  on 
the  Greek  as  we  think  it  will  bear,  in  accordance  w^ith 
the  analogy  of  scripture,  and  the  context, 

Jude,  13,  "  For  whom  the  blackness  of  darkness  is 
reserved,  eis  ton  aiona^  in  the  age."  2  Pet.  2  :  17,  "  To 
whom  [transgressors]  is  reserved  the  blackness  of  dark- 
ness, eis  aiona^  at  the  age." 

It  takes  a  Professor  of  Theology  to  make  these  texts 
teach  endless  torment ;  besides,  eis  aiona  is  marked  as 
doubtful  by  Griesbach,  and  omitted  in  the  Syriac.  We 
consider  these  phrases  as  expressive  of  oblivion  of  being, 
to  w^hich  the  wricked  w^ill  be  consigned  aty  and  tkraughout 
the  ages  of  the  Messiah. 

Eev,  19  :  2,  "  True  and  righteous  are  the  judgments 
of  God  ;  for  he  hath  judged  the  great  harlot,  who  cor- 
rupted the  earth  with  her  fornication  .  .  ,  and  her  smoke 
ascendeth,  eis  tons  aionas  ton  aionoUy  until  the  ages  of 
agesy  20 :  9,  "  And  they  ....  encircled  the  camp  of 
the  saints,  and  the  beloved  city  ;  and  fire  came  down 
out  of  heaven  from  God,  and  ate  them  up.  And  the 
devil  that  deceived  them,  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire 
and  sulphur,  where  both  the  beast  of  prey  and  the  false 
prophet  are ;  and  they  will  be  tormented  day  and  night, 
eis  tous  aionas  ton  aionon^  until  the  ages  of  the  ages." 
Kev.  14  :  9,  "A  third  angel  followed  them,  saying  .... 


TEXTS  SUPPOSED  TO  TEACH  ENDLESS  MISERY.    277 

If  any  man  worship  the  beast  of  prey  and  his  image,  and 
receive  a  mark  on  his  forehead  or  on  his  hand,  he  also 
shall  drink  of  the  wine  of  the  wrath  of  God,  \<^hich  is 
poured  out  undiluted  into  the  cup  of  his  indignation, 
and  he  shall  be  tormented  with  fire  and  sulphur,  before 
the  holy  angels  and  before  the  throne,  and  the  smoke  of 
their  torment  ascendeth  eis  aionas  aionon,  until  the  ages 
of  ages  ;  and  there  is  no  rest,  by  day  or  by  night,  to 
those  that  worship  the  beast  of  prey,  and  its  image." 
These  are  all  clear  examples  of  the  limited  meaning  of 
"  aiony 

The  preposition  eis^  which  we  have  translated  until  in 
these  passages,  because  the  context  requires  it,  and  be- 
cause in  this  connection  it  is  in  accordance  with  the 
strictest  rules  of  grammar,  can  never  bear  the  meaning  of 
^/or.'  Eis  properly  signifies  at;  but  this  its  radical 
meaning  is  differently  modified.  It  sometimes  means 
being  at^  either  as  close  beside^  or  actually  ivithin,  "  He 
actually  stood  (eis)  at  the  door."  "  To  enter  (eis)  into 
the  temple."  "  They  shall  be  fulfilled  (eis)  at  their  sea- 
son." But  it  likewise  denotes  motion  or  tendency  towards 
an  object  so  as  to  arrive  at  it ;  and  then  may  be  render- 
ed to  or  into  when  applied  to  place  ;  and  until^  when  ap- 
plied to  time;  or  referring  to  place;  ^'  They  came  (eis) 
to^  or  into^  the  land  of  Israel."  But,  as  referring  to 
time^  "  They  feast  (eis)  until  sunset."  **  He  that  endureth 
(eis)  until  the  end  shall  be  saved.".  '^  And  put  them  in 
hold  (eis)  until  the  next  day,"  It  likewise  signifies  di- 
rected at^  or  aimed  at^  and  then  may  be  translated  to^ 
wards^  in  respect  to,  respecting ^  ^c.  As  all  the  three 
texts  quoted  refer  to  time,  we  translate  m,  until,  as  the 
grammar  and  context  absolutely  require.  But  how  can 
these  texts  teach  "  eternal  torments,"  when  they  so  evi- 
dently refer  to  judgments  to  take  place  on  the  earth,  and 
to  be  inflicted  on  symbolical  personages,  or  systems, 
which  "  shall  be  utterly  burned  with  fire,"  18:8;  or  up- 
on a  succession  of  a  class  of  persons,  while  they  continue 
to  worship  the  beast  of  prey.  This  is  evident  from  the 
expressions,  "  Go  your  ways  and  pour  out  the  seven 
vials  of  God's  wrath  upon  the  earth^''  during  which  a 
space  was  given  unto  them  to  repent,  '*  and  they  repent- 
ed not."  During  a  period  while  the  kings  of  the  earth, 
that  were  enriched  by,  and  were  associated  with  Baby^ 


278  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

Ion  in  her  wickedness,  were  existing  on  the  earth,  and 
prior  to  the  seven  last  plagues^  and  who  "  will  bewail 
and  lament  for  her  when  they  see  the  smoke  of  her  burn- 
ing, standing  afar  off  for  fear  of  her  toraient."  And 
the  merchants  and  the  sailors,  when  they  see  the  smoke 
of  her  torment,  will  stand  afar  off  and  cry,  Alas  !  "  for  in 
one  hour  is  she  come  to  nought."  It  was  during  a 
period  in  which  the  saints  were  persecuted  and  died ; 
for,  "  Blessed  are  the  dead  who  die  in  the  Lord  from 
this  time."  Again,  these  torments  are  called  righteous 
judgments,  and  the  measure  is  "  of  the  cup  that  she  hath 
tilled,  fill  her  to  the  double."  Some  may  think  that 
•^  eternal  torments"  are  a  little  more  than  **  double,"  and 
will  scarcely  accord  with  their  notions  of  ''  righteous" 
judgments,  nor  be  "  according  to  their  works."  Yet 
again,  these  judgments  take  place  during  day  and  night ; 
but  "  there  shall  be  no  night  there,"  in  the  glorious  age. 
While  some  are  destroyed  in  one  way,  others  are  ''  slain 
with  the  sword,"  or  destroyed  by  milder  means.  Again, 
l^\iQ  place  of  their  torment  is  to  be  the  great  city  Baby- 
lon ;  but  that  city  is  to  be  so  destroyed,  that  the  place 
of  it  "shall  be  found  no  more  at  all."  Either  of  these 
reasons  would  be  sufficient  to  set  aside  the  idea  that  the 
torment  will  be  endless. 

TEXTS    RELATING    TO   FUTURE     PUNISHMENT    CONTAINING    THE 
ADJECTIVE    AIONIOS. 

Mat.  18  :  8,  "  It  is  better  for  thee  to  enter  into  hfe  lame 
or  maimed,  than...  to  be  cast  eis  to  pur  to  aionion^  into 
the  fire  that  pertains  to  the  age."  25  :  41,  *^  Depart 
from  me  ye  cursed  eis  to  pur  to  aionion^  into  the  fire  of 
the  age."  Mark  3  :  29,  "  But  he  that  shall  blaspheme 
(eis)  against  the  Holy  Spirit,  shall  not  have  forgiveness 
eis  ton  aiona,  at  the  age,  but  shall  be  obnoxious  to  aion- 
iou  kriseoSj  the  judgment  of  the  age."  Heb.  6:2,"  Not 
again  imparting  elementary  instruction  respecting  repen- 
tance....and  krimatos  aioniou,  the  condemnation  of  the 
age."  Jude  7,  "  As  Sodom  and  Gomorrha....are  set 
forth  an  example,  having  undergone  the  punishment  of 
pur  OS  aioniou^  an  eternal  fire."  This  last  is  Macknight's 
translation.  However  we  may  translate  aionou  here,  it 
is  certain  that  it  applies  to  a  judgment  that  has  been  al- 


AIONIOS   IN    TEXTS    RELATING   TO    PUNISHMENT.  270 

ready  inflicted.  Peter  says,  2  Epistle  2:5,"  God  spared 
not  the  old  world,  bringing  in  the  flood  upon  the  world 
of  the  ungodly ;  and  burned  up  the  cities  of  Sodom  and 
Gomorrha,  and  condemned  them  with  an  overthrow, 
leaving  them  as  an  example  to  those  that  should  after- 
wards Hve  ungodly."  The  pattern  then  of  the  manner 
in  which  the  wicked  will  be  punished  is  utter  destruction. 
We  have  no  objection  to  the  calling  this  destruction 
*  eternal^  the  cities  will  never  be  restored  ;  but  the  fire 
does  not  continue  to  burn.  Neither  will  the  aionion, 
fires,  that  will  be  lighted  when  Christ  comes,  last  long, 
for  they  will  soon  utterly  consume  their  fuel.  We  sup- 
pose we  have  given  the  sense  of  the  texts  quoted,  al- 
though some  of  them  may  mean  that  the  results  of  these 
judgments  will  be  perpetual ;  there  will  be  no  reversal, 
no  future  resurrection  to  those  that  are  destroyed  by 
aionion  fires.  The  Syriac  reads,  that  the  cities  of  So- 
dom and  Gomorrha  "  are  made  a  demonstration  to  the 
wicked  who  should  come  after  them."  The  actual  man- 
ner of  the  destruction  is  set  forth  in  the  pattern  ;  all  can 
perceive  that  they  are  entirely  destroyed  ;  but  how  could 
"  everlasting  torments"  be  an  actual  demonstration,  see- 
ing that  there  would  never  be  a  period  when  the  sentence 
w^as  fully  executed  ? 

2  Thess.  1:6,"  Since  it  is  a  righteous  thing  with  God 
to  repay  aflliction  to  those  that  aflSict  you ;  and  those 
who  are  afllicted  will  he  re-enliven  w^th  us  at  the  mani- 
festation [Syriac]  of  our  Lord  Jesus  from  heaven  with 
his  mighty  angels ;  inflicting  punishment  with  flaming 
fire,  on  those  who  know  not  God,  and  on  those  who  obey 
not  the  gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  will  suffer 
punishment,  even  olethron  aionion^  the  destruction  per- 
taining to  the  age^  from  [or  issuing  from]  the  presence 
of  the  Lord  and  the  glory  of  his  power.. ..i/i  that  day ^ 
Common  version,  "  Who  shall  be  punished  with  ever- 
lasting destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord."  Mat. 
25  :  46,  "  And  these  apeleusontai  will  go  eis  kolasin 
aionion  to  the  cutting  off  [that  takes  place]  at  the  age  ; 
but  the  righteous  [will  go]  eis  zoen  aionion^  to  life  at 
the  age."  Common  version,  "  And  these  shall  go  away 
into  everlasting  punishment;  but  the  righteous  [shall  go 
away]  into  life  eternal."  The  word  apeleusontai  appHes 
to  both  members  of  the  antithesis,  and  might  be  trans- 


280  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION. 

lated  ivill  comc^  for  strange  to  say,  the  word  means 
either.  Will  come  would  seem  more  applicable  to  the 
righteous,  but  then  we  must  say  that  the  wicked  will 
come  to  the  cutting  off.  Kolasin  is  a  noun  from  the 
verb  kclaso^  the  radical  meaning  of  which  is  to  cut  off. 
Gen.  8:2,"  And  the  rain  from  heaven  w^as  cut  off." — 
Surely  the  rain  was  not  "  punished."  It  is  used  likewise 
in  the  sense  of  pruning,  lopping  off  superfluous  branches. 
It  has  as  a  secondary  meaning  to  restrain.  The  Greeks 
write.,  "  The  charioteer  kolaso^  restrains  his  fiery  steeds." 
Now  as  the  cutting  off,  or  even  restraining,  when  applied 
to  men  is  often  a  punishment,  so  a  third  and  metaphori- 
cal use  of  the  word  may  be  punishment;  though  w^e 
think  'punishment^  as  a  meaning  of  the  word  kolaso^ 
would  never  have  found  its  way  into  the  Greek  Lexicons, 
had  it  not  been  first  used  by  our  translators.  The  word 
in  some  of  its  forms,  occurs  Acts  4  :  21,  "  Finding  no- 
thing how  they  might  cut  them  off."  They  had  already 
punished  them,  by  putting  them  in  hold,  but  they  feared 
to  cut  them  off,  because  of  the  people.  2  Pet.  2 :  9, 
"The  Lord  knoweth  how.. ..to  reserve  the  unjust  unto  a 
day  of  judgment  to  be  cut  off,"  as  were  the  antediluvians 
and  the  cities  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah.  1  John  4:18, 
"  In  love  there  is  no  fear,  therefore  perfect  love  casteth 
off  fear;  because  fear  (echei)  is  to  be  (kolasin)  cut  off." 
Echei  often  bears  the  sense  of  to  be.  These  are  all  the 
places  where  kolaso  occurs  in  the  N.  T.,  and  there  exists 
not  the  slightest  necessity,  in  any  case,  of  departing  from 
its  radical  meaning.  Mat.  25  :  46,  is  considered  the 
strongest  text  in  the  Bible  in  favor  of  "  eternal  torments." 
But  after  seeing  a  correct  and  literal  translation,  we  can- 
not perceive  how  even  the  most  reckless  can  extract 
even  an  inference  from  it  to  favor  torture  of  any  kind. 
But  the  text  that  we  have  placed  in  juxtaposition  with 
it,  declares  that  there  will  be  punishment  by  flaming  fire 
which  is  to  end  in  the  destruction  of  the  wicked  "  in  that 
day,"  "  when  the  Son  of  Man  shall  come  in  his  glory." 
Professor  Stuart  says,  "  I  take  it  to  be  a  rule  of  con- 
struing all  antithetic  ^orm^  of  expression,  that  where  you 
can  perceive  the  force  of  one  side  of  the  antithesis,  you 
do  of  course  come  to  a  knowledge  of  the  force  of  the 
other  side."  Very  well.  Will  the  reader  observe  the 
points  of  opposition.     Christ  sitteth  upon  the  throne  and 


EXPLANATION    OF    MATTHEW    XXV    46. 


281 


the  righteous  and  the  wicked  are  gathered  before  him. 
The  righteous  are  invited  to  the  inheritance  of  a  kingdom 
that  will  have  no  end,  which  inheritance  imphes  the  liv- 
ing throughout  the  reign  of  Christ,  while  the  wicked  iire 
driven  into  a  fire  that  will  not  go  out  till  it  has  utterly 
consumed  its  fuel,  and  so  the  wicked  will  be  utterly  con- 
sumed.    And  now  for  the  two  sides  of  the  antithesis. 


The  righteous 
The  wicked 


will  go  to 
will  go  to 


life 
the  cutting:  off 


aionion : 
aionion. 


The  only  points  opposed  are,  "  The  righteous,"  "  The 
wicked,"  "  Life,"  and  "  The  cutting  off "  :  the  other  parts 
are  exactly  the  same.  AVe  understand  the  meaning  of 
the Jirst  member  of  the  sentence  so  far  as  the  opposition 
is  concerned.  Now  as  life  means  conscious  exis- 
tence, and  the  other  must  be  its  opposite,  so  the  other 
must  mean  "the  cutting  off"  from  life,  or  death,  the 
privation  of  life,  the  extermination  of  being ;  which  many 
other  Scriptures  declare  will  take  place  when  Christ 
comes.  It  matters  not  how  aionion  may  be  construed, 
as  it  only  refers  to  the  age  or  period  of  the  manifestation 
of  Christ,  the  day  of  the  Lord,  "  that  shall  burn  as  an 
oven :  and  all  the  proud,  yea,  and  all  that  do  wickedly, 
shall  be  stubble :  and  the  day  that  comet h  shall  burn, 
them  UP,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,  that  it  shall  leave  them 
neither  root  nor  branch." 

We  have  endeavored,  as  was  duty,  to  set  this  text  in 
the  clearest  hght,  to  show  that  not  a  vestige  of  an  argu- 
ment can  be  predicated  upon  it  to  sustain  "  eternal  tor- 
ments." But  to  do  this  effectually  there  is  no  need  to 
depart  from  the  common  translation.  Let  '  /^/e,'  and 
^]junishment,^  and  '  everlasting^^  have  their  proper  Eng- 
lish meanings,  notwithstanding  that  by  this  we  spoil  the 
antithesis  ;  and  then  it  follows  that  the  punishment  will 
be  everlasting —which  we  readily  concede  will  be  the 
case — and  now  we  have  to  determine  the  nature  of  the 
punishment,  which  our  text  in  2  Thess.  1 :  6,  declares  to 
be  "  everlasting  destruction."  A  destruction  from 
which  there  will  be  no  restoration,  which  will  continue 
for  ever,  is  properly  called  an  everlasting  destruction. — 
But  to  sustain  a  fiivorite  hypotheses  some  will  contend 
that  punishment  implies  conscious  existence   and  that 


282  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION. 

death  is  no  punishment.  Suppose  your  son  is  condemn- 
ed for  some  delinquency,  to  one  year's  imprisonment  and 
hard  labor,  as  a  punishment  therefor  ;  will  you  petition 
the  governor  to  mitigate  his  punishment  by  giving  an 
order  for  his  immediate  execution  ?  Will  ye  arrest  the 
murderer,  when  upon  your  hypothesis,  he  has  commit- 
ted no  injury  to  his  victim  ?  fie  candid  now  and  confess 
that  the  punishment  of  death  is  the  capital  punishment. 
"  I  will  punish  her  children  with  death." 

There  are  two  texts  in  the  0.  T.  that  are  sometimes 
quoted  :  Dan.  12  :  2,  "  And  many  of  those  that  sleep  in 
the  dust  of  the  earth  shall  omake  ;  these  to  le  oulom,^  per- 
petual life,  and  those  to  reproach  and  perpetual  abhor- 
*  rence."  As  at  the  period  here  alluded  to,  the  righteous 
only  will  be  raised,  and  as  the  text  says  nothing  about 
the  suffering  or  even  the  resurrection  of  the  wicked,  so 
the  text  is  not  in  point.  Isa.  33:  14,  "Who  can  dwell 
with  everlasting  burnings  ?"  Answer ;  none :  for  they 
would  burn  them  up. 

There  is  not  a  single  case  of  the  occurrence  of  the 
word  aionios^  when  it  does  not  relate  to  the  age  of  Christ, 
but  what  absolutely  requires  a  limited  meaning.  The 
reader  will  find  upon  inspection  that  more  than  sixty 
times  aionio7is  has  reference  to  the  age  of  Christ.  And 
Professor  Stuart  himself  confesses  that,  "  The  word 
aionios,  therefore,  is,  in  the  Septuagint,  less  strictly  ap- 
plied to  indefinite  time^  an  unlimited  period^  than  it  is 
in  the  N.  T.  Just  the  same  is  the  case  with  oion^  as  we 
have  already  seen."  Add  to  this  confession  the  fact, 
that  the  sample  of  these  "  everlasting  burnings"  and 
"  unquenchable  fires,"  that  have  already  been  inflicted 
upon  Sodom  and  Gomorrha,  and  upon  Edom,  and  their 
wicked  inhabitants,  have  long  since  ceased  :  See  Isa.  66  : 
24;  34:8;  1:28;  10:16,17;  Ezk.  20:47;  compare 
the  prophecy,  2  Kings  22:  17,  with  its  accomphshment, 
25:9;  Mat.  3:10,  12;  13:30;  and  we  shall  readily 
perceive  that  no  inference  can  be  sustained,  that  is  drawn 
from  the  use  of  the  word  aion  or  aionios,  to  favor  the 
immortahty  of  the  wicked.  But  the  whole  Scriptures 
harmonize  in  the  declaration  that  man  is  mortal,  and 
that  God  has  offered  us  incorruptible  life  through  Jesus 
Christ,  and  bids  us  "  seek  for"  it 


283 


I 


THE  RICH  IAN  AND  LAZARUS. 


BY    GEORGE    STORRS. 


This  parable  has  been  insisted  upon  as  proof  of  the  conscious 
state  of  men  in  death,  and  of  eternal  torments  to  the  wicked  ;  ' 
but  we  believe  it  affords  no  evidence  of  either.  If  it  could  be 
demonstrated  to  be  a  history^  and  not  a  parable,  it  would  not 
prove  that  wicked  men  are  to  be  endlessly  tormented ;  because 
the  scene  is  laid  immediately  after  death  and  before  the  judg- 
ment ;  hence,  is  not  the  punishment  which  follows  judgment: 
that  punishment  may  be  death  or  literal  annihilation  for  all  this 
case  teaches.  But  the  whole  is  a  parable ;  and  this  fact  is  so 
notorious  that  scarcely  any  commentator,  or  any  intelligent  wri- 
ter, pretends  to  question  it.  To  call  it  a  '''literal  history,'^  in 
these  days,  is  to  manifest  fixed  bigotry,  profound  ignorance,  or 
willful  opposition  to  clearly  settled  truth.  We  shall  therefore 
occupy  no  space  in  proving  it  a  parable,  but  proceed  at  once  to 
its  exposition. 

Pambles  are  never  given  to  teach  doctrine,  but  to  illustrate 
some  truth  already  partially  known  or  about  to  be  announced  ; 
and  no  parable  is  ever  to  be  interpreted  on  the  principle  that 
every  item  contained  in  it  was  designed  to  have  an  application. 
Bishop  Lowth  says — "  Parable  is  that  kind  of  allegory  which 
consists  of  a  continued  narration  of  fictitious  or  accommodated 
events  applied  to  the  illustration  of  some  important  truth." — 
The  scope  and  design  of  a  parable  is  all  we  need  to  concern  our- 
selves about;  and  to  attempt  a  particular  application  of  every 
expression  in  it  is  to  enter  the  field  of  speculation  where  the 
most  fanciful  will  be  the  most  successful  in  turning  off*  eyes 
from  the  real  design  of  him  who  spake  the  parable. 

The  key  to  a  parable  is  either  in  the  parable  itself  or  in  the 
discourse  connected  with  it.  In  the  case  before  us,  it  is  in  the 
context.  The  scope,  or  design  of  the  parable  was  to  teach  the 
effect  to  follow  upon  two  classes  of  men  by  a  change  from  the 
Mosaic,  or  Law-dispensation  to  the  Christian,  or  Gospel  dispen- 
sation. This  fact  is  clearly  set  forth  in  the  17th  verse,  which  is 
the  key  to  the  parable,  and  unlocks  it  perfectly.  That  verse 
reads  thus — "  The  law  and  the  prophets  were"  [preached]  "until 


284  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

John:  since  that  time  the  kingdom  of  God  is  preached."  That 
is,  a  new  dispensation  of  God's  favor  is  now  opened  ;  no  longer 
to  be  confined  to  the  Jews,  or  one  nation,  but  to  embrace  ''  all 
nations"  in  its  offered  benefits.  This  change  would  atVect  very 
differently  two  different  classes  of  men ;  viz.,  the  Jews,  who 
were  under  the  law,  and  the  Gentiles,  who  arc  to  be  embraced 
under  the  gospel,  or  to  be  made  partakers  of  those  peculiar 
blessings  which  had  been  hitherto  so  exclusively  confined  to 
the  sons  of  Abraham.  The  effects  of  this  change  are  illustrated 
by  the  parable  under  consideration.  The  parties  concerned  and 
to  be  affected  are  distinctl}'  marked.  The  items  relating  to  the 
rich  man  clearly  mark  him  as  the  representative  of  the  Jews,  as 
a  people.  We  note  his  case  first.  His  dress.  He  was  *'  clothed 
in  'purple  andjine  liiien.^^  Now  turn  to  "  the  law^''  that  was 
'•''until  Johnr  and  see  what  was  the  clothing  of  the  priests  under 
that  law.  See  Exodus  28;  where  Moses  was  commanded  to 
make  for  Aaron  and  the  other  priests  ''  garments  for  glory  and 
beauty."  Verses  5,  6,  8,  and  15 — "And  they  shall  take  gold, 
and  blue,  and  purple,  and  scarlet  and  Jine  linen.  And  they 
shall  make  the  ephod  of  gold,  blue,  and  purple,  scarlet,  and  Jine 
twined  Ii7ie7i.  **  And  thou  shalt  make  the  breast-plate  *  *  of 
purple  *  *  and^?ie  twined  linen."  Such  were  the  peculiarities 
of  the  dress,  or  clothing  of  these  representatives  of  the  law  and 
the  Mosaic  dispensation,  or  Jewish  sj^stem.  These  peculiarities 
our  Lord  commences  with  in  his  description  of  the  rich  man; 
and  they  are  sufficiently  striking  to  satisfy  the  unprejudiced  in- 
quirer after  truth  that  the  Jews,  nationally,  were  to  be  repre- 
sented by  the  rich  man  in  the  parable.  The  Jews  were  7^ch  in 
those  abundant  communications  of  truth,  knowledge,  and  pecu- 
liar privileges  which  God  had  endowed  them  with  by  direct  com- 
munications, or  through  the  prophets  whom  he  had  raised  up  to 
instruct  them  from  time  to  time,  till  at  length  he  spake  unto 
them  "  by  his  Son^  Rich  were  they,  indeed,  in  these  high  and 
exalted  advantages  over  all  other  nations  and  people.  It  were 
easy  to  enlarge  here,  but  we  study  brevity.  The  period  of  their 
exclusive  enjoyment  of  those  peculiarities  was  their  "  life-time ;" 
but  the  time  came  that  those  peculiarities  were  to  pass  away ; 
and  that  period  is  represented  as  a  death.  It  was  the  death  of  their 
whole  ecclesiastical  polity — it  was  now  to  be  superseded  by  a 
more  spiritual  and  universal  system,  embracing  other  people : 
the  "  life-time^''  of  their  peculiarities  is  ended — the  change  has 
come  over  them,  symbolized  b}'  a  death  and  burial.  Where 
next  is  this  once  rich  man  found?  Is  it  in  the  theological 
helll  No:  it  is  not  even  in  Gehenna  ;  but,  in  Hades.  The 
preceding  part  of  this  work  has  sufficiently  explained  these 
terms,  and  we  do  not  therefore  stop  to  dwell  upon  them  here. 
The  rich  man  is  alive  after  his  ecclesiastical  death  ;  but  is  stript 
of  all  his  peculiarities  and  reduced  to  a  state  of  wretchedness  and 
torment.     And  does  not  the  history  of  the  Jews,  as  a  people, 


THE    RICH    MAN    AND    LAZARUS.  285 

iVom  the  overthrow  of  their  temple,  city,  and  sacrifices 
there,  unto  this  day,  or  present  century,  fully  justify  the  parabo- 
lical description  given  by  our  Lord  of  the  miscr}^  to  which  they 
would  be  subjected  under  the  new  dispensation  which  was  to 
follow  theirs  ?  No  one  can  doubt  this  who  has  any  knowledge 
of  their  history  for  the  last  eighteen  hundred  years  :  and  if  we 
have  not  understanding  of  their  history,  read  the  prophecies  of 
the  judgments  threatened  them,  Lev.  26th  and  Deut.  28th 
chapters,  and  '*be  no  longer  faithless  but  believing."  '*  Wrath 
has  come  upon  them  to  the  uttermost."  1  Thess.  2:  16.  And 
Jesus  said,  relative  to  the  overthrow  of  their  city  and  the  tribu- 
lation to  attend  and  follow  that  event — "  These  be  the  days  of 
vengeance  that  all  things  which  are  written  may  be  fulfill" 
erf."    Lk.21:22. 

Since  the  ecclesiastical  and  national  death  of  the  Jews — the 
rich  man — there  has  been  a  claim  maintained  among  them  that 
^*  Abraham"  is  their  *' father;"  but  no  relief  has  come  to  them 
from  that  quarter. 

The  desire  expressed  by  the  rich  man,  that  further  light  or 
information  should  be  given  to  convince  the  nation  or  people  of 
Jews,  by  a  resurrection  of  one  from  the  dead,  is  met,  in  the 
parable,  by  showing  that  no  further  information  would  avail 
with  those  who  had  rejected  all  the  previous  light  God  had  given 
them  :  and  the  answer — "  neither  will  they  be  persuaded  though 
one  rose  from  the  dead," — was  shown  to  be  true  by  the  conduct 
of  "the  chief  priests  and  pharisees,"  when  Jesus  actually  raised 
a  ^^  Lazarus''^  from  the  dead,  [John  11th,]  the}^  called  a  "  coun- 
cil," and  "  from  that  day  forth  took  counsel  together  for  to  put 
Jesus  to  death."  How  true  that  they  would  not  "  be  persuaded 
though  one  rose  from  the  dead  ;"  and  after  they  had  accomplish- 
ed their  bloody  purpose,  and  put  Christ  to  death,  and  he  also 
had  been  raised  from  the  dead,  under  such  circumstances  that 
there  was  no  chance  to  doubt  the  fact,  the  same  obstinate  unbe- 
lief remained  ;  and  they  gave  large  sums  of  money  to  the  sol- 
diers to  tell  the  most  silly  and  improbable  lie  that  was  ever  in- 
vented ;  viz.,  That  the  disciples  of  Jesus  came  by  night  and  stole 
Jesus  away  while  they  slept ! ! 

Thus  the  parable,  so  far  as  the  rich  man  is  concerned,  has  a 
fair  and  full  application,  and  illustrates  the  obstinate  unbelief  and 
consequent  misery  and  torment  of  that  people,  after  their  final 
refusal  to  receive  Jesus  as  the  Messiah. 

It  only  remains  now  briefly  to  consider  that  part  of  the  para- 
ble relating  to  the  poor  man,  or  Lazarus.  Prior  to  the  change 
in  the  dispensations,  from  the  Mosaic  to  the  Christian,  the  Gen- 
tiles were  poor  indeed  in  religious  knowledge,  and  excluded  from 
the  peculiar  privileges  of  the  Jews — the  rich  man.  They  could 
only  approach  the  ^'' outer  cau.rf^ — or  ''gate" — of  the  Temple  ser- 
vice: where  some  of  them  sought  the  '^  crumbs^^  of  knowledge 
which  might  better  their  condition.     Still  their  general  condi- 


286  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. 

tion  in  regard  to  divine  *•' things"  was  *-evil."  The  time  at 
length  arrives  when  they  are  no  longer  to  remain  in  this  condi- 
tion, and  that  change — to  keep  up  the  harmony  of  the  parable — 
is  represented  by  a  death.  They  pass  out  of  their  previous  state 
and  find  themselves  in  **  Abraham's  bosom" — partakers  in  that 
covenant  God  made  with  Abraham  ;  for,  "If  ye  be  Christ's  then 
are  ye  Abraham's  seed,  and  heirs  according  to  the  promise." 
Gal.  3  :  29.  To  this  honor  they  are  brought  through  the  minis- 
tration of  angels — aggellon — messengers.  Christ  gave  his  mes- 
sengers  commission  to  "  go  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the 
gospel  to  every  creature."  Under  this  commission  the})-  brought 
many  Gentiles  into  the  Abrahamic  covenant;  for,  The  Scripture 
foreseeing  that  God  would  justify  the  heathen  [the  Gentiles,] 
through  faith,  preached  before  the  gospel  unto  Abraham,  saying, 
*'In  thee  shall  all  nations  be  blessed."  Gal.  3;  8  And  the 
apostle  adds — '•  So  then  they  which  be  of  faith  are  blessed  with 
faithful  Abraham:"  they  are  in  •'  Abraham's  bosom  :"  a  phrase 
which  imports  a  partaker  of  his  blessings  and  being  in  the  same 
covenant  relation  to  God.  In  this  condition  are  all  believing 
Gentiles,  and  are  now  ^'' comforted  f  while  the  obstinate  unbe- 
lieving Jew  from  the  time  of  Christ,  or  from  the  introduction 
of  the  Christian  dispensation,  has  been  '"tormented:'''^  and  the 
"  ^m//*"  between  the  two  dispensations  is  "mpa^^afeife" — they 
cannot  be  joined  in  one  :  to  come  into  the  blessings  of  the  Chris- 
tion  dispensation  is  impossible  to  any  one  still  cleaving  to  the 
Mosaic  for  justification;  and  to  return  from  the  Christian  to  the 
Mosaic  is  to  *'  fall  from  grace,"  and  to  be  swallowed  up  in  the 
gulf. 

We  might  greatly  enlarge  the  proof  that  the  foregoing  is  the 
true  srcope  and  design  of  the  parable ;  but  we  believe  enough  has 
been  said  to  satisfy  the  candid  inquirer  after  truth,  and  we  have 
no  expectation  that  obstinate  bigotry  will  be  removed,  even  tho' 
another  Lazarus  should  arise  from  the  dead  and  affirm  the  truth 
of  the  exposition  we  have  here  given. 


287 


BIBLE  VS.  TRADITON.— APPENDIX 


A  HISTORY  OF   THE  PRESENT  POPULAR  OPINIONS  CON- 
CERNING THE  DOCTRINE  OF  HUMAN  IMMORTALITY. 


BY   REV   J.    PANTON   HAM,    BRISTOL,    ENGLAND. 


We  propose  a  historical  inquiry  into  the  present  popular 
opinions  on  the  doctrine  of  Human  Immortality.  The  no- 
tions now  current  on  this  subject  we  believe  to  be  altogether 
unscriptural,  and  a  most  mischievous  corruption  of  BibUcal 
Christianity.  The  unscriptufal  character  of  these  current 
opinions  we  intend  to  discuss  and  disclose.  At  present  we 
are  but  doctrinal  chroniclers, — historians  of  opinions.  Our 
inquiry  will  demonstrate  that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  an 
hereditary  faith,  not  necessarily  a  Scriptural  faith.  We 
think  it  will  demonstrate  more, — that  such  a  faith  is  the 
popular  faith  in  the  theory  of  the  soul's  intrinsic  immortality, 

THE  APOSTOLICAL  FATHERS THE  FIRST  AND  SECOND  CENTURIES. 

The  Apostolical  Fathers,  or  Clement  of  Eome,  Polycarp, 
Ignatius,  Barnabas  and  the  Pastor  of  Hermas,  are  so  call- 
ed as  having  been  contemporaries  with  the  Apostles  of  our 
Lord.  Their  opportunities  of  being  informed  concerning 
the  doctrines  of  -Christianity  were  therefore  pecuhar,  ana 
their  testimony  is  of  a  corresponding  value.  Let  us  not, 
however,  unduly  exaggerate  the  doctrinal  value  of  their 
writings ;  for  although  their  opportunities  were  what  we 
have  stated,  it  is  quite  conceivable  that  other  circumstances 
should  tend  to  depreciate  the  value  of  their  personal  testi- 
mony. Their  testimony  is  nevertheless  valuable,  if  not  au- 
thoritative ;  and  by  the  clearer  light  of  Scripture  they  may 
be  read  with  considerable  profit.  In  their  writings,  we 
never  meet  with  those  conventional  phrases  of  modern  ortho- 
doxy about  the  soul, — its  separate  state  and  iramortahty. 
"  Immortal  soul," — ^^  never-dying  soul," — ^^  deathless  soul," 


288  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION APPENDIX. 

^'  separate  soul," — "  disembodied  soul," — these  and  such 
like  expressions  are  never  to  be  met  with  in  the  canonical 
and  primitive  Scriptures.  They  belong  to  a  more  recent 
religious  nomenclature.  The  prevaihng  opinions  of  the 
Apostolical  Fathers  are  clearly  set  forth  in  their  epistolary 
writings,  where  they  uniformly  speak  as  if  they  had  no 
philosophy  about  the  elementary  constittients  of  the  human 
constitution,  but  regarded  man  as  one  indivisible  being,  de- 
pending upon  his  organization  for  his  personal  existence. — 
In  the  estimation  of  these  early  writers  death  was  the  abso- 
lute  decease  of  the  conscious  being  man,  and  he  could  only 
live  after  dissolution  by  being  re-organized,  or  raised  up 
from  the  dead.  They  never  allude  to  a  state  of  conscious- 
ness between  death  and  resurrection,  but  speak  much  of 
their  hope  in  being  raised  up  out  of  their  graves  by  their 
Lord, — **  the  Resurrection  and  the  Life."  It  should  strike 
the  reader  as  very  remarkable  that  the  Apostolical  Fathers 
never  allude  to  a  state  of  glorification  for  the  righteous  in 
a  disembodied  condition  of  existence,  when  this  is  the  grand 
theme  of  modern  Christian  teaching  and  hope  ;  and  on  the 
other  band,  that  they  so  frequently  and  emphatically  refer 
to  a  being  raised  up  out  of  the  grave,  when  the  resurrection 
occupies  so  subordinate  a  place  in  the  present  popular  creed 
and  ordinary  pulpit  ministrations.  The  coming  of  Christ 
too, — how  they  dwell  upon  and  hail  that  event ! — like  the 
beloved  Apostle,  ''  Come,  Lord  Jesus  !" — "  Even  so,  come, 
Lord  Jesus  !"  The  second  coming  of  Christ  was  a  neces- 
sary and  cardinal  doctrine  in  the  creed  of  those  primitive 
saints,  who,  like  their  apostolic  contemporary,  ^'  suffered 
the  loss  of  all  things"  to  "  attain  unto  the  resurrection  of 
the  dead." 

But  let  them  speak  for  themselves  : — "  Blessed  are  those 
priests,"  writes  Clement,  "who  having  finished  their  course 
before  these  times,  have  obtained  a  fruitful  and  perfect  dis- 
solution."...." All  the  ages  of  the  world,  from  Adam  even 
unto  this  day,  are  passed  away ;  but  they  who  have  been 
made  perfect  in  love  have,  by  the  grace  of  God,  obtained  a 
place  [by  inheritance,  not  yet  by  realization]  among  the 
righteous,  and  shall  be  made  tnanifest  in  the  judgment  of 
the  kingdom  of  Christ.  For  it  is  written,  *  Enter  into  thy 
chambers  for  a  little  space,  till  my  anger  and  indignation 
shall  pass  away :  and  I  will  remember  the  good  day  [the 
resurrection  day],  and  will  raise  you  up  out  of  your 
GRAVES."     I  Ep.  to  Corinth. 


THE    A?PO^TOLICAL    FATHERS.  289 

Says  Polycatp,  ^^  If  we  please  [the  Lord]  in  this  present 
world,  we  shall  also  be  made  partakers  of  that  which  is  to 
•come,  according  as  he  has  promised  to  v^  that  he  will  raise 
us  from  the  clead^  and  that  if  we  shall  walk  worthy  of  him, 
we  shall  also  mgn  tog^th^r  with  himJ''     Ep.  to  Philip, 

Ignatius,  in  the  following  quotation,  expresses  plainly  his 
belief  that  immortality  is  not  inherent  in  the  human  consti- 
tution, but  a  comiminication  through  Christ,  as  says  the 
Apostle, — "  The  gijtoi  God  is  eternal  life  {or  immortality] 
through  "OUT  Lwd  Jesus  Vkrist^     In  his  Ej«s.  to  the  Eph., 
Ignatius  writes, — "  For  this  cause    did  the    Lord   suffer 
the    ointment    to  be  poured  on  his  head  [or  was  anoint- 
ed for  his  burial]  that  he  relight  breathe  the  breath  of  im- 
^Lortality  into  his  Church,     Be  ye  not  therefore  anointed 
with  the  -evil  savor  of  tfie  doctrine  of  the  prince  of  this 
world,  let  him  not  take  you  captive/ro;^^  the  life  that  is  set 
hefore  youP     Again  :  Men's  ignorance  was  taken  away, 
and  the  old  kingdom  abohshed,  God  himself  being  made 
manifest  in  the  form  of  ;a  man,yc>r  the  renewal  of  eternal 
Ufe.     From  thence  began  what  God  had  prepared ;  ^r<?^;t 
thenceforth  things  were  disturbed, /or^smwc^  as  he  designed 
to  abolish  deaths     And  yet  again  :  "  That  ye  [he  says], 
breaking  one  and  the  «ame  bread,  w^hich  is  the  medidjie  of 
immortality^  our  antidote  that  we  should  not  die^  but  live 
for  &ver  in  Christ  Jesus,^^     In  his  Epi«tle  to  the  Magne- 
sians,  Ignatius  writes, — ^^^  Seeing  then  all  things  have  an  end, 
there  are  these  two  together  set  before  us,  death  and  life:; 
and  every  one  shall  depart  unto  his  proper  place."     To  the 
'Trallians  he  writes :  Jesus  Christ  "  was  truly  raised  from 
the  dead  by  his  Father,  after  the  manner  as  He  will  also 
raise  up  us  who  believe  in  Him,  by  Christ  Jesus,  without 
whom  we  have  no  true  life.''''     To  the  Romans  he  writes  : 
'^^  For  it  is  good  for  me  to  set  from  the  world  unto  God, 
^hat  I  may  rise  agahi  unto  him.... T^ut  if  I  shall  suffer,  I 
shall  then  become  the  freeman  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  shall 
Hsefree.''^     There  is  a  \qtj  :singular  passage  in  the  Epistle 
to  the  Smyrnaeans  which  at  tfirst  si^ht  may  appear  to  favor 
the  notion  that  m^n  can  live  in  a  state  of  disembodiment. 
'"  He  [Christ]  suffered  truly,  as  he  also  truly  raised  uphim- 
■selt ;  and  not  as  some  unbehevers  say,  that  he  ^cmly  seemed 
to  suffer,  they  themseOives  only  seeming  to  be.     And  as 
fthey  believe  so  it  shdl  -happen  -mit©  them,  when  being  di- 
vested of  the  body,  they  shall  become  mere  spirits^''''  or  in- 
<jorporeal.     That  the  reader  maj  understand  thi^  passage. 


290  BIBLE  VS,    TRADITION, APPENDIX. 

it  is  necessary  to  remark  that  Ignatius  is  here  alluding  to  a 
very  mischievous  heresy  which  sprung  up  in  the  apostolie 
age,  under  the  name  of  Docetism^  or  the  doctrme  of  the 
Docetae.  This  sect  were  so  called  because  they  professed 
the  opinion  that  Christ  did  not  really  suffer  and  die  on  the 
crosSy  but  only  in  appearance.  They  denied  the  reality  of 
Christ^s  corporeal  nature^aad  maintained  that  his  flesh  and 
blood  were  phantasmal  only.  Their  name,.  Docetae,  is  de- 
rived from  a  Greek  word  signifying  to  seem  or  appear. 
Now,  it  is  against  the  professors  of  this  strange  notion,  that 
Christ  was  a  mere  phantom,  that  Ignatius  directs  his  re- 
marks. His  language  is  obviously  ironical.  He  certainly 
bad  no  Scripture  warrant  for  saying  that  these  primitive 
heretics  should  hve  after  death  as  disembodied  souls,  nor 
does  he  indeed  say  so.  What  he  says  virtually  is,  that 
when  they  are  dead  they  shall  pass  away  into  mere  phan- 
toms,— or  have  no  real  existence.  So  far  from  according 
with  the  present  popular  notions  of  a  state  of  disembodi- 
ment for  the  soul  or  spirit,  this  language  makes  directly 
against  that  notion  ;  for  it  is  the  utterance  of  a  malediction, 
— the  ironical  denunciation  of  a  punishment  suitable  to  the^ 
abettors  of  so  silly  a  heresy.  "  I  know,"  he  adds,  "  that 
even  after  his  resurrection  he  was  in  the  flesh ;  and  I  beUeve 
that  he  is  still  so.  And  when  he  came  to  those  who  were 
with  Peter,  he  said  unto  them,  *  Take,  handle  me,  and  see 
that  I  am  not  an  incorporeal  demon.''  "  Not  as  some  in  our 
own  day  strangely  imagine  our  Lord  to  mean,  that  he  was- 
not  a  disembodied  huinari  soul ;  because  he  said,  *  Handle 
me  and  see ;  for  a  spirit  [not  my  spirit]  hath  not  flesh  and 
bones,  as  ye  see  me  have."  "  Behold  my  hands  and  my 
feet,"  said  our  Lord,  "  that  it  is  I  myself^''  not  some  other 
spiritual  being, — or,  as  Ignatius  expresses  it,  an  "  incorpo- 
real demonJ^  Neith-ei*  our  Lord  nor  Ignatius  make  any 
allusion  to  such  a  notional  entity  as  a  disembodied  soul,  or 
spirit.  This  Apostolical  Father  treats  at  some  length  of 
this  heresy,  which  it  is  easy  to  understand,  was  of  a  very  per- 
nicious character.  The  following  words  express  more  em- 
phatically his  Bocetic  antagonism,  and  at  the  same  time  set 
Ibrth  his  views  of  the  future  life,  only  through  a  resurrec- 
tion from  the  dead.  "  If  all  these  things  were  done  only 
in  show  by  our  Lord,,  then  do  I  also  seem  only  to.  be  bound. '^ 
...."  But  much  better  would  it  be  for  them  to  receive  it 
[that  is,  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  real  humanity  and  passion 
on  the  cross^  of  which  the  eucharist  was  the  symbol]^  that 


THE   APOSTOLICAL    FATHERS.        ^  291 

they  wight  one  day  rise  through  it.^^  The  Apostolical  Fa- 
thers opposed  the  error  of  the  Docetse,  chiefly  on  the  ground 
that  it  destroyed  the  reality  of  Ohrist^s  resurrection  ;  for 
if  he  only  seemed  to  suffer  and  die,  he  could  only  have  seemed 
to  rise  again,  and  hence  their  Christian  hope  of  future  life, 
and  its  grand  evidence  and  pledge,  were  both  denied  and 
destroyed.  The  doctrine  of  the  Apostolical  Fathers  was 
that  of  the  Apostles  themselves,  that  "  if  Christ  be  not 
raised"  from  the  dead,  '*  faith  is  vain,"  and  "  they  which 
are  fallen  asleep  in  Christ  are  perished  ;"  because  without 
a  resurrection  they  cannot  live  again  ;  and  if  Christ  is  not 
raised  from  the  dead,  but  is  still  under  the  power  of  death 
and  will  ever  remain  so,  then  none  will  be  raised, — there 
can  be  no  future  Hfe. — all  are  ^^  perished^ 

The  object  of  Christ's  mission  is  thus  set  forth  by  Barna- 
bas in  his  Catholic  Epistle, — "Now,  how  he  suffered  for  us, 
seeing  it  was  by  men  that  he  underwent  it,  I  will  show  you. 
The  prophets  having  received  from  him  the  gift  of  prophe- 
cy, spake  before  concerning  him ;  but  he,  that  he  might 
abolish  death,  and  make  known  the  resurrection  from  the 
dead,  was  content,  as  it  was  necessary,  to  appear  in  the 
flesh,  that  he  might  make  good  the  promise  before  given  to 
our  fathers  ;  and  preparing  himself  a  new  people,  might 
demonstrate  to  them,  whilst  he  was  upon  earth,  that  after 
the  resurrection  he  would  judge  the  worlds  Now,  as  judg- 
ment precedes  rewards  and  punishments,  this  language  ob- 
viously impHes  that  until  the  resurrection  takes  place  there 
can  be  neither  a  state  of  reward  nor  punishment.  "  It  is 
appointed  unto  men,"  says  the  Scripture,  "  once  to  die,  but 
after  this  the  judgment.^''  Not,  as  the  popular  Christianity 
teaches,  "  after  death"  rewards  and  punishments, — then  re- 
surrection from  the  dead, — then  judgment, — and  then  again 
rewards  and  punishments  !  Such  bungling  and  confusion 
belong  not  to  the  revelation  of  Scripture  nor  the  creed  of 
the  apostolical  believers. 

The  passages  bearing  on  this  subject  in  the  writings  of 
the  Pastor  of  Hermas  are  too  numerous  for  quotation  here. 
Suffice  it  to  say,  that  he  uniformly  describes  the  condition 
of  the  unconverted  as  a  state  of  death,  and  union  with 
Christ  as  securing  the  hope  of  a  future  and  eternal  life. 
Nothing  can  be  plainer  than  that  the  ApostoHcal  Fathers 
were  consentaneous  in  the  belief  of  the  essential  mortality 
of  the  human  race  ;  that  they  had  no  philosophy  concern- 
ing the  human  nature  corresponding  to  the  Platonized 


292  Bible  vs.  tradition.— appendix. 

Christian  philosophy  of  modern  times  ;  and  that  their  only 
expectation  of  the  future  life  was  by  means  of  a  resur- 
rection from  the  dead.  It  is  undeniable  that  they  believed 
nothing  about  disembodied  human  souls,  and  a  condition 
of  rewards  and  punishments  intermediate  between  death 
and  resurrection.  In  this  mortal  interval,  the  dead,  ac- 
cording to  them,  slumbered  in  **  the  land  of  forgetfulness.'' 
[Psa.  88  :  10-12.J  Thought  ceased  its  activity,  and  con- 
sciousness, hke  the  expired  flame,  had  become  extinguish- 
ed. These  primitive  saints,  in  common  with  prophets  and 
apostles,  looked  forward  to  the  "  good  day,'' — the  day  of 
the  Lord's  second  coming,  to  open  the  graves  of  his  slum- 
bering ones,  and  redeem  them  from  the  dominion  of  death. 
Their  hope  was  in  a  resurrection  from  the  dead,  hence  they 
preached  the  resurrection  of  Christ  as  the  evidence  and 
pledge  of  his  people's  resurrection  unto  Hfe,  and  jealousy 
guarded  this  first  principle  of  Christian  doctrine  against  the 
contemporary  heresies,  among  which  that  of  the  Docetse 
was  the  chief  How  unlike  the  degenerate  theology  of 
modern  Christianity,  in  which  the  grand  cardinal  doctrine 
of  Resurrection  from  the  Dead  is  almost  lost  sight  of! — 
The  pagan  philosophy  of  Plato,  patronized  by  the  popular 
churches,  has  substituted  the  doctrine  of  an  independent 
human  immortality^  hence  immortality  as  the  gift  of  God 
by  Christ  is  not  known ;  it  has  taught  the  world  to  believe 
in  a  state  of  Hfe  during  death,  hence  the  modern  Christiani- 
ty has  an  imported  phraseology  about  "  departed  souls," 
"  immortal  souls,"  "  souls  in  glor}^,"  "  souls  in  torments," 
of  which  the  Scriptures  and  Apostohcal  Christians  know 
nothing.  A  state  of  glorification  immediately  after  death 
for  the  "  disembodied  soul,"  obviously  supersedes  the  doc- 
trine of  a  resurrection.  Let  the  Churches  of  our  degene- 
rate modern  Christendom  mark  the  contrast  betw^een  the 
scriptural  and  primitive  doctrine  of  Immortality  and  that 
doctrine  as  professed  by  themselves.  Let  them  note  the 
dtrange  phenomena,  that  the  Apostles  and  their  contempo- 
raries speak  much  of  life  as  the  gift  of  God  by  Christ,  and 
life  obtainable  by  resurrection,  and  never  once  allude  to 
"  immortal  souls,"  and  "  souls  in  glory,"  or  ''torment,"  at 
death  ;  whereas  both  the.  Protestant  and  Popish  Churches 
(the  latter,  indeed,  to  no  small  advantage)  reverse  this  mode 
of  preaching, — they  preach,  in  strange  contradiction  to  in- 
spired and  primitive  testimony,  that  man  is  immortal  by 
natural  constitution,  and  that  he  can  live  while  he  is  dead. 


THE   APOSTOLICAL    FATHERS. 


Thanks  be  to  God,  amidst  this  doctrinal  dej 
Scripta  manet  I 


FROM    THE    SECOND    TO    THE    FIFTH    CENTU: 


The  controversy  concerning  human  immortality  com- 
menced so  early  as  the  latter  part  of  the  second  century, 
and  was,  as  might  be  supposed,  considerably  influenced  by 
the  philosophical  notions  of  the  time  concerning  the  con- 
stitution of  man.  The  anthropology,  or  doctrine  of  man, 
of  the  earlier  theologians,  embraced  a  threefold  division  of 
the  elements  of  his  nature  into  body,  soul,  and  spirit.  The 
language  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  in  1  Thess.  v.  23,  was  ac- 
cepted, not  in  its  proper  rhetorical,  but  in  a  strictly  philo- 
sophical sense,  and  interpreted  according  to  the  philosophy 
of  the  times.  Some  adopted  the  duahstic  theory,  or  two- 
fold division  of  the  nature  of  man  into  body  and  soul ;  the 
latter  being  regarded  as  a  substance  essentially  distinct 
from  the  corporeal  part  or  body.  The  question  of  human 
immortahty  thus  from  the  first  became  mixed  up  with 
speculative  ideas,  and  a  phraseology,  the  offspring  of  the 
primitive  philosophy,  was  begotten,  which  has  unfortunate- 
ly survived  to  our  own  times  and  added  much  to  the  con- 
fusion and  difficulty  of  the  inquiry.  It  is  of  the  first  im- 
portance to  apprise  the  student  of  this  controversy  that  the 
inquiry  took  at  the  outset  a  particular  form, — a  strictly 
philosophical  form.  The  question  was  rather  metaphysical 
than  religious,  although  it  involved  important  rehgious  con- 
sequences. The  ancient  anthropology  lay  at  the  basis  of 
the  theological  inquiry  concerning  the  immortality  of  man. 
Hence  the  peculiar  phraseology  of  the  primitive  philoso- 
phical theology.  The  question  was  not  concerning  the  inl- 
mortality  oiman  in  his  complete  characteristic  nature,  but 
concernmg  the  immortality  of  the  soul  as  a  supposed  dis- 
tinct and  separable  part  of  man,  and  the  seat  of  the  human 
personality.  If  immortality  pertained  to  man's  natural 
constitution,  it  could  only  pertain  to  that  part  of  him  which 
was  imagined  to  be  independent  of  any  material  organiza- 
tion, and  not  liable  to  the  laws  of  material  existence.  The 
soul  was  considered  to  be  this  part, — an  immaterial  sub- 
stance, capable  of  existing  in  a  state  separate  from  the  body. 
It  is  undeniable  that  this  notion  about  the  separate  state 
of  the  soul,  and  its  being  the  seat  of  personal  consciousness, 
was  an  importation  into  Christianity  of  the  old  Greek  philo- 


201  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION. APPENDIX. 

£.ophy.  The  departed  souls  of  the  early  Christianity  were 
the  shades  of  Homer  and  the  Greeks. 

We  are  anxious  to  guard  our  readers  against  the  very 
natural  mistake  ot  identifying  the  ideas  of  the  early  specu- 
lative Christians  with  those  of  the  sacred  writers.  The 
terminology  of  their  philosophy,  in  regard  to  the  terms 
soul,  spirit,  body,  flesh,  is  the  terminology  of  the  Scriptures, 
and  there  is  a  danger  of  concluding  that  these  terms,  com- 
mon to  both,  have  a  common  value  and  signification.  The 
locality  or  state  of  the  dead,  moreover,  is  called,  both  in 
Scripture  and  the  Greek  philosophy,  HadeSy  the  unknown 
or  unseen  place  or  state,  as  this  word  etymologically  means. 
But  it  may  suffice  here,  for  the  sake  of  showing  the  diffe- 
rence between  the  Hebrew  theology  and  the  Grecian  philo- 
sophy, that  while  the  Greeks  peopled  their  Hades  with  dis- 
embodied spirits  or  souls  in  a  state  of  consciousness  and 
activity,  the  sacred  writers  describe  their  Hades  as  the 
resting  place  of  the  dead, — a  condition  of  "  darkness," — a 
"  land  of  forgetfulness," — where  thought  and  memory  are 
extinguished,  and  silence  alone  prevails.  "  The  dead  know 
not  anything."  ''  In  that  very  day  their  thoughts  perish." 
"  The  dead  praise  not  the  Lord,  neither  any  that  go  down 
into  silence."  Let  our  readers  mark  this  important  distinc- 
tion, lest  they  be  betrayed  into  the  common  popular  error 
of  supposing  that  the  terms  soul,  body,  &c.,  of  Scripture 
have  the  same  verbal  value  as  these  terms  have  in  the 
speculative  theology  of  the  second  century,  and  which, 
through  the  prevalence  of  the  ancient  philosophy  during  the 
successive  periods  of  historic  Christianity,  has  become  the 
orthodox  theology  of  our  own  times.  Modern,  as  well  as 
ancient  Christianity,  retains  the  faith  of  the  old  Pagan 
philosophy  of  the  Greeks  concerning  the  soul  and  its  im- 
mortality, and  regardless  of  the  extraordinary  consequences 
of  imposing  these  Pagan  ideas  upon  the  sacred  nomencla- 
ture of  the  Bible,  persists  in  avowing  the  ancient  philoso- 
phical faith,  and  interpreting  the  Scriptures  on  its  false 
principles. 

The  scriptural  inquiry,  as  we  have  already  remarked, 
concerns  not  the  soul  as  a  distinct  substance  and  part  of 
man,  but  man  as  a  creature  of  God,  "  fearfully  and  won- 
derfully made."  The  former  is  strictly  a  philosophical,  the 
latter  a  religious,  inquiry.  But  the  deductions  of  human 
philosophy  have  ever  been  intruded  into  this  religious  ques- 
tion, and  have  so  eflectually  influenced  the  language  of  the 


THE   APOSTOLICAL    FATHER'S.  295 

controversy,  that  without  <jarefuliy  noting  this  fact,  confus- 
«ion  and  dissatisfaction  must  necessarily  ensue.  At  the 
very  opening  of  the  inquiry,  in  the  discussions  which  took 
place  ill  the  second  century,  we  observe  a  departure  from 
the  language  of  Scripture,  and  a  phraseology  employed 
<3oincident  with  the  ancient  philosophy.  The  inquiry  im- 
properly relates  to  the  soui^  instead  of  to  the  ivhole  man^  of 
how  many  soever  parts  he  may  be  compounded.  But  not- 
withstanding this  circumstance,  there  were  those  who,  in- 
olining  no  doubt  to  the  Scripture  revelation, — that  immor- 
tality is  a  gift  or  Christian  rewaad^  and  not  a  personal  or 
inherent  possession, — 'demed  the  immortality  of  the  abstract 
isoul,  and  maintained  that  it  perished  in  death  with  the  body. 

Among  these  Justin  Martyr  must  unquestionably  be 
numbered.  In  hi-s  Dialogue  with  Trypho  there  occurs  a 
passage  which,  whatever  he  may  have  meant  by  it,  certain- 
ly involves  the  eondiusion  that  the  soul  is  not  in  itself,  by 
•constitution,  immortal.  "  I  indeed  say  not  that  all  souls 
die,''  certainly  implies  that  some  souls  die,  and  if  some  die, 
then  there  is  nothing  in  the  souPs  constitution  essentially 
independent  of  destruction.  "  At  the  time  of  judgment," 
he  again  says,  ^^  those  ^ouh  that  appear  worthy  of  God  die 
no  more;  but  the  rest  shall  be  punished  as  long  as  G>od 
shall  be  pleased  to  continue  their  existence,  and  their  punisb- 
tnent."  Tatian  is  more  explicit.  "  The  soul  in  itself,"  he 
■says,  "  is  not  immoi'tal,  but  mortal ;  nevertheless  it  has  the 
power  of  escaping  mortality."  Theophilus  of  Antioch 
raises  the  following  question,  ^*  Was  Adam  created  with  a 
mortal  or  immortal  nature  ?"  and  replies,  ^^  neither  the  one 
fior  the  other,  but  he  was  fitted  for  both,  in  order  that  he 
might  receive  immortality  as  a  reward."  The  historian 
of  doctrines,  Professor  Hagenbach,  remarks  on  the  state  of 
the  controversy  at  this  period,  that  it  had  "  more  of  a  philo- 
sophical than  Christian  bearing.... The  Christian  doctrine  of 
immortality,"  he  «ay«,  -"  cannot  be  considered  apart  from 
the  person,  work,  and  kingdom  of  Christ,  and  must  rest 
^pon  Christian  perceptions  and  promises." 

The  testimony  of  Irenseus,  the  contemporary  of  Justin 
Martyr,  is  equally  emphatic.  He  argued  that  whatever 
had  a  birth  or  beginning  mu«t  be  mortal  and  corruptible. 
^^  Life,"  he  writes,  "  is  not  from,  ourselves,  nor  from  our  na- 
ture, but  it  is  given  ar  bestowed  according  to  the  grace  of 
God;  and  therefore  he  who  preserves  thi&  gift  of  life  and 
returns  thanks  to  him  who   bestows  it,  he  sh.ill  receive 


296  BIBLE   VS.  TRADITION. APPENDIX. 

length  of  days  for  ever  and  ever.  But  he  who  rejects  it  aD(3 
proves  unthankful  to  bis  Maker  for  creating  him,  and  will 
not  know  him  who  hestows  it^  he  deprives  himself  of  the 
gift  of  duration  to  aU  eternity.  And  therefore  the  Lord 
speaks  thus  of  such  unthankful  persons,  '  If  you  have  not 
been  faithful  in  that  which  is  least,  who  will  commit  much 
to  you  V  intimating  thereby  unto  us  that  they  who  are  un- 
thankful to  him  with  respect  to  this  short  transitory  life,, 
which  is  his  gift,  the  effect  of  his  bounty ^  shall  be  most 
justly  deprived  of  length  of  days  in  the  imrld  to  come.''^  No 
language  can  be  more  explicit  than  the  foregoing.  It  ex- 
presseSy  as  definitely  as  language  can,  that  man  has  no  con- 
stitutional immort£$lityy  and  that  unless  ^born  again'  of 
^incorruptible  seed, '^ — the  'word  of  God  which  hveth  and 
abideth  for  ever,'  be  must  without  doubt  perish  everlast- 
ingly. 

The  theory  of  Tertullian,  who  flourished  in  the  third 
century,  exhibits  th^  extent  to  which  speculative  inquiry 
went  in  connection  with  the  doctrine  of  immortality.  Thi» 
celebrated  Father  put  forth  a  new  doctrine^  as  much  phy- 
siological as  theological,  in  which  he  maintained  that  the 
human  soul  was  propagated,  hke  the  body,  by  ordinary  but 
distinct  generation, — the  soul  being  begotten  by  the  soul^ 
as  the  body  by  the  body,  of  the  parent.  He  tells  that  God 
made  Adam^s  soul  ^  matricem  omni^m^'^ — the  fountain  or 
source  of  all  souls.  His  theory  is  known  by  the  name 
Traducianism  {per  traducem).  Dod well  justly  reasons  that 
Tertullian's  opinions  concerning  the  soul  "  are  inconsistent 
with  its  independence  upon  purer  matter,  though  it  might 
sundve  the  grosser  organical  body  of  our  visible  humanity. 
....If  therefore,"  he  argues,,  ''  it  be  preserved  from  actual 
mortality  it  must  be  by  the  like  interposition  of  an  extra- 
ordinary providence,  as  that  by  which  our  bodies  them- 
selves are  to  be  immortalized  after  the  resurrection." 

In  the  following  century  the  Traducianism  of  Tertullian 
was  opposed  by  the  doctrine  that  the  soul  had  its  creation 
immediately  from  God^  and  was  neither  propagated  by 
traduction,  nor  born  together  with  the  body^as  Lactantiu« 
and  others  supposed.  This  new  theory  is  denominated 
Creationism.  The  difficulties  involved  in  these  respective 
systems  inclined  many  theologians,  among  whom  was  Au- 
gustine, to  ignore  the  controversy  altogether,  and  declare 
their  opinion  that  human  science  found  a  limit  in  this  direc- 
tion beyond  which  it  was  impossible  to  pass.     The  two 


THE   APOSTOLICAL    FATHERS.  297 

theories  were  consequently  tolerated  as  legitimate  specula- 
tions, and  although  they  necessarily  involved  the  natural 
mortality  of  the  soul,  were  not  on  this  account  pronounced 
heretical.  "  It  is  plain,'"  writes  Dodwell,  **  that  they  did 
not  ihen^  in  the  fifth  century,  believe  this  doctrine  of  the 
souVs  natural  mortality  heretical,  so  long  as  there  was  no 
question  made  of  its  being  actually  immm'taV  The  strength 
and  influence  of  both  parties  led  to  something  like  a  mutual 
compromise,  nevertheless  the  orthodox  doctrine  was  that 
the  soul  is  constitutionally  immortal.  Lactantius  contend- 
ed that  immortality  was  not  the  natural  property  of  the  soul, 
but  the  reward  of  virtue ;  and  in  this  opinion  he  was  forti- 
fied by  the  testimony  of  the  earlier  Greek  theologians,  who 
aflSrm  that  the  Hebrews  did  not  believe  in  the  constitutional 
immortahty  of  man,  but  considered  it  dependent  upon  a 
virtuous  character.  Nemesius,  a  Greek  philosopher  of  the 
fourth  century,  and  a  convert  to  Christianity,  afterwards 
made  Bishop  of  Emesa,  in  Phoenicia,  also  testifies  to  the 
faith  of  the  Hebrews  : — "  the  Hebrews  confessedly  say  that 
man  was  created  from  the  first  neither  mortal  nor  immor- 
tal, but  capable  of  either  nature  ;  that  should  he  incline  to 
fleshly  passions,  he  might  incur  the  fate  of  the  flesh  ;  but  if 
he  aspired  after  spiritual  excellence,  he  should  be  esteemed 
worthy  of  immortahty." 

Origen  differed  both  from  Tertullian  and  the  Creationists, 
and  gave  it  as  his  opinion  that  human  souls  had  a  pre-ex- 
istence.  By  this  theory  he  easily  disposed  of  the  objection 
that  what  had  a  beginning  could  not  be  inherently  immor- 
tal. "  Among  the  primitive  Christians,"  says  Dodwell, 
"  this  doctrine  of  Origen  was  taken  for  very  singular,  nor 
did  the  great  authority  of  the  man  recommend  it  to  many 
among  them.  They  generally  condemned  it  in  Plato  him- 
self They  generally  took  it  for  a  maxim  in  arguing,  that 
whatever  had  a  beginning  could  not  be  necessarily  or  natu- 
rally immortal.  On  this  principle  they  owned  none  im- 
mortal but  God  himself, — no,  not  the  angels." 

Eusebius,  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History,  informs  us  of  a 
sect  existing  in  the  third  century  in  Arabia  who  denied  the 
natural  immortahty  of  the  soul.  They  appear  to  have  been 
of  sufficient  importance  to  give  occasion  to  "  a  considerable 
council,  to  take  into  consideration  what  at  this  period  among 
professional  theologians  was  pronounced  a  heresy.  "These," 
writes  Eusebius,  "  asserted  that  the  human  soul,  as  long  ag 
the  present  state  of  the  world  existed;  perished  at  death 


298  BIBLE   VS.    TRADITION.. —APPENDIX. 

and  died  with  the  body,  but  that  it  would  be  raised  again 
with  the  body  at  the  time  of  the  resurrection."  Against 
the  opinions  of  these  primitive  Arabians,  the  theological 
powers  of  Origen,  the  great  champk)n  of  the  nascent  ortho- 
doxy, were  enlisted,  and  who  appears  to  have  been  success- 
ful in  overturning  their  previous  faith,  and  bringing  them 
to  the  persuasion  of  the  new  Platonism,  or  philosophical 
Christianity,  which  w^as  rapidly  extending  itself  over  the 
ancient  Christendom. 

Some  of  the  Fathers  of  this  period,  among  whom  were 
Cyprian,  Arnobius,  and  Athanasius,  considered  the  soul 
to  be  naturally  mortal,  and  ascribed  its  immortality  to  the 
communication  of  the  Divine  Spirit.  It  must,  however,  be 
acknowledged  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Church, — the  ortho- 
dox, and  which  was  daily  becoming  the  popular  doctrine 
was,  that  the  soul  is  immortal.  Subtile  disputes  in  theolo- 
gy were,  in  those  earlier  times,  as  in  our  own,  mostly  con- 
fined to  professional  theologians,  the  "  laity"  not  concern- 
ing themselves  with  these  disputes,  grew  in  a  less  discrimi- 
nating and  more  dogmatic  faith.  The  immortahty  of  the 
soul,  in  some  sense  or  other,  was  the  orthodox,  if  not  the 
universal,  belief 

In  concluding  our  sketch  of  the  state  of  the  doctrine  of 
immortality  at  the  close  of  the  fifth  century,  it  is  scarcely 
necessary  to  remind  the  reader  of  the  very  speculative 
character  of  the  period  comprised  in  this  section.  The 
doctrine  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul  took  its  rise  in  mere 
philosophical  conjecture;  was  debated  as  a  question  of  hu- 
man science,  and  established  upon  this  necessarily  imper- 
fect basis.  Its  introduction  into  the  earlier  Christianity  is 
attributable  to  the  influence  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  Fa- 
thers, Gieseler,  in  his  Compendium  of  Ecclesiastical  His- 
tory, acknowledges  this  influence  in  the  d(>ctrinal  theology 
of  this  period.  "  A  speculative  treatment  of  Christian  doc- 
trine was,"  he  says,  "  generally  indispensable,  if  Christiani- 
ty should  be  accessible  to  the  philosophical  culture  of  the 
times,  and  was  rendered  unavoidable  by  the  measures  of 
the  Gnostics.  It  could  only  proceed  from  Platonism,  which 
of  all  philosophical  systems  stood  the  nearest  to  Christiani- 
ty. While  many  Platonic  philosophers  were  brought  over 
to  Christianity  by  this  internal  relation,  they  received  the 
latter  as  the  most  perfect  philosophy,  and  retained,  with 
their  philosophical  mantle,  their  philosophical  turn  of  mind 
glsQi     Tbej^  iet  out  with  this  principle  *  *  that  the  truth 


FROM   FIFTH   TO    SIXTEENTH    CENTURY.  299 

taught  by  Plato  was  derived  from  Moses  and  the  prophets. 
The  arbitrary  mode  of  interpretation  then  current  furnish- 
-ed  them  with  the  means  of  proving  their  views,  even  from 
numerous  passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  they  could 
use,  indeed,  only  in  the  Septuagint  version.  Thus,  then, 
they  overvalued  even  the  actual  agreement  of  Plato  with 
•Christianity,  and  believed  tliat  they  found  many  a  Platonic 
idea  in  the  latter,  which  in  reality  they  themselves  had  first 
introduced  into  it." 

FROM   THE  FIFTH   TO   THE    SIXTEENTH    CENTURY  ^   OR  AGE   OF 
^  THE    REFORMATION." 

The  impulse  given  to  the  speculative  spirit  by  the  intro- 
duction into  Christianity  of  the  philosophic  element  of  Pla- 
tonism,  in  the  second  century,  was  by  no  means  restrained 
during  the  period  of  which  we  are  writing.  Indeed,  it  is 
notorious  that,  from  the  time  of  this  admixture  of  human 
and  Divine  science  to  the  present  hour,  the  doctrine  of  hu- 
man immortality  has  been  built  up  on  a  ratiocinative  and 
logical  basis  merely,  and  the  Bible  has  been  very  coolly  ig- 
nored as  if  it  had  no  deliverance  to  make  on  the  matter.— 
As  we  have  already  seen,  the  doctrine  of  the  soul's  immor- 
tality had  become  the  orthodox  and  popular  faith  of  the 
Church,  but  the  doctors  still  disagreed  on  the  question. 
They  who  held  the  dualistic  theory,  or  a  twofold  division  of 
man  into  body  aiid  soul,  affirmed  the  biX)ad  proposition  that 
the  soul  was  an  independent  and  immortal  substance.  The 
advocates  of  the  threefold  division  into  body,  soul,  and 
spirit,  denied  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  as  did  the  earlier 
Greek  theologians,  and  maintained  that  the  soul  becomes 
immortalized  by  its  union  with  the  spirit.  Nicholas,  of 
Methone,  was  the  champion  of  this  philosophical  doctrine 
in  the  Greek  Church.  Ullmann,  quoted  by  Hagenbach, 
thus  reports  him,  "  It  is  not  every  soul  that  neither  perishes 
nor  dies,  but  only  the  rational,  truly  spiritual,  and  divine 
soul,  which  is  made  perfect  through  virtue,  by  participation 
in  the  grace  of  God.  For  the  souls  of  irrational  beings, 
and  still  more  of  plants,  may  perish  with  the  things  which 
they  inhabit,  because  they  cannot  be  separated  from  the 
bodies  which  are  composed,  and  may  be  dissolved  into  their 
elements,"  Elsewhere  he  says,  ^^  When  any  created  being 
is  eternal,  it  is  not  so  hy  itself,  nor  in  itself,  nor  for  itself, 
but  by  the  goodness  of  God ;  for  all  that  is  made  and 


300  BIBLE  VS.  TRADITION APPENDIX. 

created  has  a  beginning,  and  retains  its  existence,  only  thro' 
the  goodness  of  the  Creator."  In  tho  Western  Churches 
the  doctrine  of  the  soul's  intrinsic  immortality  was  taught 
as  a  theological  truth  ;  but  the  chief  leaders  of  the  scholas- 
tic sects,  Thomas  Aquinas  and  Duns  Scotus,  were  at  issue 
on  the  question  whether  the  doctrine  was  capable  of  being 
satisfactorily  proved  by  the  independent  reason.  Aquinas 
had  drawn  a  distinction  between  the  sensitive  soul  (anhna 
sensitiva)  and  ih^  rational  ^ou\  (anima  inteUectiva\  which 
enabled  him  to  ascribe  immortality  to  the  latter,  or  rational 
part  of  man's  nature  only.  ''  The  rational  principle  {intel- 
lectivum  principitim)  w^hich,"  he  says,  "  we  call  the  human 
soul,  is  incorruptible."  The  mode  of  proof  which  is  adopt- 
ed is  that  which  has  been  often  used  since,  and  is  with  some 
an  argument  still.  "  The  human  reason,"  he  argued,  "  con- 
ceives itself  absolute  and  adequate  to  all  time.  Henco 
whatever  has  reason  has  naturally  a  desire  to  live  always. 
But  a  natural  desire  cannot  be  without  its  object,  there- 
fore every  rational  substance  {intellectvalis  substantia)  is  in- 
corruptible or  immortal."  The  validity  of  this  mode  of 
proof  was  not  so  apparent  as  to  command  universal  assent. 
Scotus  refused  to  accept  it,  and  replied  that  the  "  immor- 
tality of  the  soul  cannot  be  logically  proved."  The  Scho- 
lastics, of  the  AristoteUan  school,  generally  denied  any  in- 
herent immortality  in  man.  Aristotle  himself  said  that  im- 
mortality was  not  inherent  in  the  constitution  of  man,  but 
was  communicated  {thusathen).  But  the  Platonists  labor- 
ed hard,  at  the  close  of  this  period,  to  estabhsh  their  favo- 
rite dogma  of  the  soul's  immortality.  All  their  philoso- 
phical  strength  was  brought  to  bear  against  the  Aristotelian 
theory,  in  w^hich  they  were  most  effectively  aided  by  the 
Pope,  w^ho  came  in  with  his  baton  of  infallibility,  and  at 
once  decided  the  controversy  by  the  dictum  of  spiritual 
authority.  A  Council  of  the  Lateran,  held  A.  D.  1513^ 
under  Pope  Leo  X.,  pronounced  the  proper  immortality  of 
the  soul  an  article  of  Christian  faith,  and  discarded  the  dis- 
tinction between  theological  and  philosophical  truths  as  un- 
tenable. The  following  is  a  translation  of  the  Canon  which 
was  enacted  at  this  Council,  as  published  by  Caranza  : — 

**  Whereas,  in  those  our  days,  some  have  dared  to  assert  concerning  the  nature 
of  the  reasonable  soul,  that  it  is  mortal,  and  one  or  the  same  in  all  men; 
dnd  some,  rashly  philosophizing,  declare  this  to  ba  true,  at  least  according 
to  philosophy.  We.  with  the  approbation  of  the  sacred  Council,  do  condemn 
and  reprobate  all  those  who  assert  that  the  intellectual  soul  is  mortal,  oj 


FROM    FIFTH   TO    SIXTEENTH    CENTURY.  301 

one  and  the  Fame  in  all  men,  and  those  who  call  these  things  in  question  : 
seeing  that  the  soul  is  not  only  truly,  and  of  itself,  and  essentially  the  form 
of  the  human  body,  as  is  expressed  in  the  Canon  of  Pope  Clranent  the  Fifth, 
published  in  the  General  Council  of  Vienna,  but  likewise  immortal,  and, 
according  to  the  number  of  bodies  into  which  it  is  infused,  is  singularly 
multipliable,  multiplied,  ai^d  to  be  multiplied.  *  *  And  seeing  that  truth 
never  contradicts  truth,  we  determine  every  assertion,  which  is  contrary  to 
revealed  faith,  to  be  false  ;  and  we  strictly  inhibit  all  from  dogmatizing 
otherwise,  and  we  decree  that  all  who  adhere  to  the  like  erroneous  asser- 
tions shall  be  shunned  and  punished  as  heretics." 

However,  neither  Popes  nor  Councils  can  lay  an  effective 
embargo  on  thought.  Men,  endowed  with  mental  indepen- 
dence, cannot  be  brought  to  acquiesce  in  the  mere  authori- 
tative decisions  of  their  fellow  men,  though  wearing  the 
triple  mitre  of  spiritual  absolutism.  And  this  Council,  Lu- 
ther says,  was  of  so  little  authority  as  to  be  laughed  at  and 
despised  by  the  Eomanists  themselves.  The  most  notable 
philosopher  of  Italy,  in  Leo's  time,  was  Pietro  Pomponazzo. 
This  distinguished  man  took  upon  himself  to  maintain  that 
the  soul  is  absolutely  mortal.  Extracts  from  Papal  letters 
by  Contelori,  show  that  Pietro  was  immediately  and  per- 
emptorily assailed  on  the  opinion  which  he  had  avowed. — 
"  Pietro,  of  Mantua,"  it  is  there  said,  "  has  asserted  that, 
according  to  the  principles  of  philosophy,  and  the  opinion 
of  Aristotle,  the  rational  soul  is,  or  appears  to  be  mortal, 
contrary  to  the  determination  of  the  Lateran  Council.  The 
Pope  commands  that  the  said  Pietro  retract,  otherwise  that 
he  be  proceeded  against."  The  Pontificate  of  Leo  w^as  an 
epoch  in  the  history  of  the  doctrine  of  the  soul's  immortali- 
ty. It  was  then  that  the  successful  effort  was  made  to 
establish  and  give  permanence  to  this  doctrine  ;  but  it  was 
made  by  a  usurper  of  the  right  of  private  judgment,  and 
accomplished  by  an  act  of  sacerdotal  despotism.  The  ad- 
vocates of  the  doctrine  of  the  soul's  immortality  need  to  be 
reminded  of  this  suspicious  passage  in  its  historic  progress. 
The  seal  of  authority  was  affixed  to  it  by  a  Eoman  Pon- 
tiff, in  the  dawm  of  the  sixteenth  century, — a  man,  the  wor- 
thy counterpart  of  England's  Charles  II., — fond  of  fashion 
and  field  sports,  and  mixing  up  in  all  the  dissipated  ex- 
cesses of  the  sacred  metropolis.  Such  was  his  extrava- 
gance, that  '*  the  charge  has  been  laid  at  his  door,"  says 
Kanke,  "  that  he  ran  through  the  wealth  of  three  Pontifi- 
cates,— that  of  his  predecessor,  from  whom  he  inherited  a 
considerable  treasure  ;  his  own,  and  that  of  his  successor, 
to  whom  he  be(j[ueathed  a  mass  of  debt."     "  It  certainly 


302  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION APPENDIX. 

cannot  be  denied,"  says  the  same  historian,  "  th^t  his  life 
did  not  correspond  to  that  befitting  the  supremo  head  of 
the  Church."  It  was  during  the  Pontificate  of  I.eo  the 
Tenth  that  Luther  visited  Rome,  and  where  the  hcen- 
tiousness  of  the  Papal  court  and  clergy  so  astonished  and 
disgusted  him,  that  from  that  time  his  reverence  for  the 
Pope  was  completely  and  for  ever  destroyed.  What  must 
have  been  the  corrupt  influence  of  this  Papal  oracle  of  or- 
thodoxy, when  in  Rome  it  was  a  characteristic  of  good 
society  to  dispute  the  fundamental  elements  of  Christianity  I 
"  One  passes  no  longer,"  says  P.  Ant.  Bandino,  "  for  an 
accomplished  man,  unless  he  entertain  some  heterodox 
notions  of  Christianity."  "  At  Court,"  proceeds  Ranke, 
"  they  spoke  of  the  institutions  of  the  Catholic  Church,  of 
passages  in  the  holy  scriptures,  only  in  a  tone  of  jesting  ; 
the  mysteries  of  faith  were  held  in  derision."  Such  was 
Pope  Leo  the  Tenth,  and  such  the  circle  of  sanctified 
society  of  which  he  was  the  animating  centre  !  Behold, 
ye  asserters  of  your  ow^n  inherent  immortality,  the  worthy 
"•  nursing-father"  of  your  faith  ! — the  hero  of  a  hey-day 
heterodoxy  ! — the  jolly  jester  with  the  solemn  sanctities  of 
scripture  ! — the  mocker  of  the  sacred  mysteries  !  Worthy 
patron  of  a  Pagan  progeny  !  Let  it  be  registered  as  the 
genuine  genealogy  of  a  fundamental  doctrine  of  modern 
British  Christendom,  that  the  Pagan  Plato  was  its  father, 
and  the  profligate  Pope  Leo  its  foster-father.  Born  and 
bred  by  the  Pagan  philosophy  and  the  protege  of  Popery, 
this  notion  of  the  souPs  immortality  has  become  a  pet 
dogma  of  Popular  Protestantism,  which,  with  a  strange 
forgetfulness  of  its  low  lineage,  openly  declares  it  to  be 
the  honorable  ofispring  of  a  true  orthodoxy  ! 

FROM    THE    REFORMATION    TO    THE    PRESENT    TIME. 

Papal  influence  had  been  declining  for  some  time 
previous  to  the  Reformation  ;  but  by  the  dawn  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  it  reached  the  nadir  of  its  popularity. 
The  character  of  Leo  X.,  and  the  condition  of  his  Court, 
as  we  have  already  seen,  were  anything  but  adapted  to 
inspire  respect  for  the  triple  crown.  As  the  symbol  of  a 
spiritual  dominion,  it  was  very  generally  despised,  and 
only  a  suitable  opportunity  was  wanted  to  give  unmis- 
takable expression  to  the  reactionary  feeling  which  exten- 
sively pervaded  this  age.    Luther  afforded  this  opportunity ; 


FROM   THE   KEFORMATION   TO    THE   PRESENT   TIME.        303 

and  by  his  manly  though  perilous  course,  delivered  his 
own  and  subsequent  generations  from  the  powerful  spell 
of  Papal  absolutism.  The  great  German  Heformer  as- 
sumed an  unwonted  position  in  the  giant  presence  of 
Papal  infallibility.  The  old  orthodox  obsequiousness  was 
spurned  by  the  strong  individuality  and  godly  sincerity  of 
his  spirit.  He  spoke  disdainfully  of  the  decrees  of  Popes, 
after  he  discovered  the  deference  due  to  the  Word  of  God. 
The  decrees  of  Pope  Leo,  for  the  reasons  before  assigned, 
he  had  a  special  contempt  for.  He  thus  ironically  res- 
ponded to  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  the  Lateran  held 
during  the  Pontificate  of  this  Pope  : — "  I  permit  the  Pope 
to  make  articles  of  faith  for  himself  and  his  faithful, — such 
as  the  soul  is  the  substantial  form  of  the  human  body, — 
the  soul  is  immortal^ — with  all  those  monstrous  opinions 
to  be  found  in  the  Eoman  dunghill  of  decretals  \  that  such 
as  his  faith  is,  such  may  be  his  gospel,  such  his  disciples, 
and  such  his  Church,  that  the  mouth  may  have  meat  suit- 
able for  it,  and  the  dish  a  cover  worthy  of  it."  The  belief 
of  Luther  is  plainly  expressed  in  these  words,  on  the  doc- 
trine of  the  soul's  immortality ;  it  is  evident  that  he  refused 
to  acknowledge  this  doctrine.  The  philosophy  of  Luther 
led  him  to  conceive  of  the  human  soul  as  a  distinct,  but 
not  an  immortal,  subsistence.  The  soul,  he  imagined,  was 
separated  from  the  body  in  death  ;  but  he  did  not  believe 
in  its  continued  consciousness  between  death  and  resurrec- 
tion. He  embraced  and  taught  the  doctrine  of  the  sleep 
of  the  soul^  and  continued  in  that  belief  to  the  close  of 
his  life. 

The  prominence  given  by  Luther  to  the  doctrines  of 
the  non-immortahty  of  the  soul,  and  its  unconsciousness  in 
death,  induced  Sir  Thomas  More  to  publish  a  work  in 
reply,  objecting  to  the  views  advocated  by  the  Beformer. 
This  reply  of  More's  called  another  distinguished  witness 
into  the  arena  of  controversy, — William  Tyndale,  the  trans- 
lator : — ''  In  putting  departed  souls  in  heaven,  hell,  and 
purgatory,"  says  Tyndale,  '*  you  destroy  the  arguments 
wherewith  Christ  and  Paul  prove  the  resurrection.  What 
God  doth  with  them,  that  shall  we  know  when  we  come 
to  them.  The  true  faith  putteth  the  resurrection^  which 
we  be  warned  to  look  for  every  hour.  The  heathen  philo- 
sophers denying  that^  did  put  that  the  souls  did  ever  live. 
And  the  Pope  joineth  the  spiritual  doctrine  of  Christ,  and 
the  fleshly  doctrine  of  philosophers  together, — things  so 


304  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION ArPENDIX. 

contrary  that  they  cannot  agree  ....  And  because  the 
fleshly-minded    Pope    consenteth    unto   heathen    doctrine, 

therefore  he  corrupteth  the  scriptures  to  establish  it 

If  the  souls  be  in  heaven,  tell  me  why  they  be  not  in  as 
good  case  as  the  angels  be  ?  And  then  what  cause  is 
there  of  the  resurrection  ?" 

Sir  Thomas  More  asked, — "  What  shall  he  care,  how 
long  he  live  in  sin  that  believeth  Luther,  that  he  shall  after 
this  life  feel  neither  good  nor  evil  in  body  nor  soul,  until 
the  day  of  doom  ?"  To  which  Tyndale  rephed, — "  Christ 
and  his  Apostles  taught  no  other,  but  warned  to  look  for 
Christ's  coming  again  every  hour  :  ivhich  coming  again^ 
because  ye  believe  will  never  be^  therefore  have  ye  feigned 
that  other  merchandize?^ 

The  above  quotations  prove  that  the  present  popular 
doctrines  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  and  a  state  of 
conscious  life  between  death  and  the  resurrection,  were 
not  doctrines  held  by  Luther  and  the  first  Reformers. 
Luther  calls  them  "  monstrous  opinions,"  and  Tyndale 
declares  that  they  were  "  heathen"  and  "  fleshly  doc- 
trines," and  subversive  of  the  scripture  doctrines  of 
Christ's  second  coming,  and  the  resurrection  from  the 
dead. 

Calvin  now  entered  the  arena,  by  the  publication  of  a 
tractate  entitled  "  Psychopannychia,"  a  word  of  Greek 
derivation,  intended  to  express  the  idea  that  the  soul  is 
awake  in  a  state  of  consciousness  through  the  whole  night 
of  death.  "  As  to  the  book  itself,"  writes  an  anonymous 
reviewer  in  the  year  1772,  "  it  is  hot,  furious,  and  abusive. 
The  Hypnologists  [sleep- preachers]  as  he  [Calvin]  calls 
them,  are  babblers,  madmen,  dreamers,  drunkards,  &c. 
Happily  for  them,  his  arguments  are  as  feeble  and  sophis- 
tical as  they  themselves  could  wish."  From  Calvin's  time, 
the  doctrine  of  the  soul's  immortality,  and  its  dependent 
dogmas,  have  gradually  found  their  way  into  the  several 
Protestant  confessions  ;  and  to  this  hour,  these  heathen 
heresies  are  accepted  by  the  Romish,  and  all  the  Reformed 
Churches,  as  Christian  verities. 

In  the  year  1706,  Henry  Dodwell,  a  Clergyman  of  cele- 
brity, espoused  the  doctrine  of  the  mortality  of  the  soul, 
and  so  revived  the  controversy.  He  associated,  however, 
wuth  his  subject,  some  singular  notions,  the  nature  of 
which  will  be  best  perceived  by  the  following  copy  of  the 
title  page  of  bis  book  : 


FROM   THE    REFORMATION    TO    THE    PRESENT    TIME.        305 

*^  An  Epistolary  Discourse,  proving  from  the  Scriptures, 
and  the  First  Fathers,  that  the  Soul  is  a  Principle  Natu- 
rally Mortal  ;  but  Immortalized  actually  by  the  pleasure 
of  God  to  Punishment,  or  to  Keward,  by  its  Union  with 
the  Divine  Baptismal  Spirit.  Wherein  is  Proved  that 
none  have  the  power  of  giving  this  Divine  Immortalizing 
Spirit,  since  the  Apostles,  but  only  the  Bishops."  [!!] 

This  book  called  out  several  antagonists  ;  and  the 
"  learned  Dodwell,"  as  he  was  respectfully  called,  had  the 
satisfaction  of  seeing  this  question  of  the  soul's  immortality 
again  very  widely  agitated,  and  warmly  debated. 

The  controversy  throughout  has,  as  we  have  seen,  been 
too  much  mixed  up  with  philosophical  and  ecclesiastical 
traditions.  The  Reformers  spoke  of  the  sleep  of  the  soul^ 
implying  the  old  Platonic  idea,  that  the  soul  is  a  distinct 
subsistence^ — and,  indeed,  that  it  is  the  essential  human 
being  in  a  state  of  torpor,  which  they  called  its  "  sleep," 
or  "  rest." 

Dodwell  reasons  like  a  clerical  believer  in  baptismal 
regeneration,  diifering  from  the  modern  Tractarian  school 
in  this  respect, — that  his  regeneration  was  physical ^  where- 
as  theirs  is  spiritual  only.  It  has  remained  to  our  own 
times,  to  see  the  doctrine  put  in  its  proper  hght,  although 
it  is  still  but  very  imperfectly  apprehended  by  some  ad- 
vocates, as  well  as  opponents.  The  true  statement  of  the 
doctrine,  we  apprehend,  does  not  concern  the  soul  or  spirit, 
— but  MAN.  AVe  should  not  ask  whether  the  soul  is  mortal 
or  immortal  ;  but  whether  man  is  one  or  the  other.  The 
scripture  teaches  nothing  about  the  soul  as  a  subsistence 
distinct  from  the  body.  Man  is  sometimes  called ^6^5^, 
and  sometimes  soul, — *'  All  Jlesh^''  "  Man  became  a  living 
soul^''  &c. 

Bishop  Law,  the  author  of  the  ''  Call  to  the  Uncon- 
verted," in  an  "  Appendix"  to  his  "  Considerations  on  the 
Theory  of  Religion,"  published  in  1755,  shook  to  its  foun- 
dations the  popular  doctrine  of  a  conscious  intermediate 
state.  Dr.  Warburton  also  laid  himself  open  to  the  sus- 
picion of  heterodoxy  on  this  subject,  in  his  third  edition  of 
the  ''  Divine  Legation  of  Moses,"  published  in  1752.  In 
his  fourth  edition  of  that  work,  he  altered  his  phraseology, 
which  had  given  occasion  to  the  suspicion,  not,  however, 
without  incurring  the  charge  of  trimming  to  popular 
prejudice. 

Many  eminent  bibhcal  scholars,  since  Law's  time,  have 


306  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION APPENDIX. 

turned  their  attention  to  this  controversy.  In  the  city  of 
Norwich  it  was  mooted  by  the  labors  of  Mr.  Bourne,  and 
also  by  Mr.  John  Marsom,  who,  in  addition  to  the  publica- 
tion of  two  small  volumes,  which  have  passed  through  two 
editions,  advocated  his  opinions  in  the  Monthly  Repository. 
The  controversy  has  passed  through  what  we  may  call  its 
philosophical  period,  and  is  now,  by  most  thinking  and 
well-read  persons,  acknowledged  to  be  a  Bible  question. 
In  this  all  but  universal  admission  we  rejoice,  as  tending 
to  popularize  a  subject  so  necessary  to  be  understood  by 
all,  whether  learned  or  unlearned.  We  are  thankful  that 
the  advanced  intelligence  of  our  own  times  has  seen 
through  the  fallacy  of  the  ''  Argument  from  Reason ;"  and 
that  such  elaborate  sophisms  as  Mr.  Samuel  Drew's  "  Es- 
say" are  universally  voted  to  the  shelf,  as  now  altogether 
beside  the  question,  which,  at  one  time,  they  were  thought 
so  triumphantly  to  elucidate,  and  even  to  settle. 

The  theological  writings  of  the  learned  Dr.  Whately, 
Archbishop  of  Dublin,  have  exercised  considerable  intiu- 
ence  in  reviving  the  controversy  in  our  ow^n  times.  The 
scholastic  popularity,  as  well  as  ecclesiastical  eminence  of 
this  dignitary  of  the  English  Church,  have  secured  for  his 
writings  an  amount  of  attention  and  respect  beyond  those 
of  his  contemporaries.  His  work,  entitled  ''  A  View  of 
the  Scripture  Revelations  concerning  a  Future  State," 
has  been  extensively  read  by  professional  theologians  ; 
and  since  the  pubhcation  of  this  book,  many  others  have 
issued  from  the  press,  from  the  pens  of  both  Clergymen  and 
Nonconformist  Ministers.  The  Rev.  Reginald  Courtenay, 
Rector  of  Thornton  Watless,  issued,  in  the  year  1843,  a 
goodly  octavo  volume,  under  the  title  of  '*  The  Future 
States,"  advocating  the  unpopular  side  of  the  question, 
and  which  he  dedicated  to  Archbishop  Whately.  This 
was  followed,  in  the  ensuing  year,  by  a  httle  w^ork  called 
"  Notes  of  Lectures,"  afterwards  considerably  amplified  in  a 
clever  and  closely  reasoned  book,  published  in  1846,  by  H. 
H.  Dohney,  a  Baptist  Minister,  at  Maidstone,  entitled, 
"  The  Scrfpture  Doctrine  of  Future  Punishment."  Almost 
simultaneously  with  this  work  of  Mr.  Dobney's,  appeared 
a  volume  from  the  pen  of  Mr.  Edw^ard  White,  a  Congre- 
gational Minister,  in  Hereford.  Mr.  White's  book,  "  Life 
in  Christ,"  contains  much  valuable  matter,  in  defence  of 
the  non-immortality  of  man,  and  the  final  destruction  of 
the  wicked.     Since  these  works,  others  have  issued  from 


PROM    THE    REFORMATION    TO    THE    PRESENT   TIME.        307 

the  press.  Three  Nonconformist  Ministers,  one  in  Edin- 
burgh, another  in  Bristol,  and  the  third  in  Plymouth,  have, 
in  addition  to  their  public  testimony  as  preachers,  put  on 
record  their  convictions  in  pamphlets  and  larger  works. 
Mr.  W  Glen  MoncriefF,  a  Congregational  Minister  iu 
Edinburgh,  has  pubhshed  his  "  Dialogues  on  Future 
Punishment,"  a  work  on  ''  Soul,"  and  is  about  to  issue 
a  companion  to  the  foregoing,  to  be  entitled  "  Spirit." 
Besides  these,  Mr.  MoncriefF  has  edited  a  pamphlet  by 
Mr.  Grew,  of  Philadelphia,  U.  S.,  called  the  "  Intermediate 
State."  In  the  spring  of  1849,  Mr.  J.  Panton  Ham,  Con- 
gregational Minister,  of  Bristol,  issued  a  volume  of  lectures 
on  "  Life  and  Death  ;  or  the  Theology  of  the  Bible  in 
relation  to  Human  Immortality."  The  first  edition  of 
this  book  sold  in  the  first  year  of  its  publication  ;  and  a 
second,  somewhat  enlarged,  was  sent  forth  in  the  spring  of 
1851.  As  a  supplement  to  this  work,  he  issued  another, 
entitled  "  The  Generations  Gathered  and  Gathering  ;  or 
the  Scripture  Doctrine  concerning  Man  in  Death."  Both 
these  books  have  since  been  repubhshed  in  New- York, 
United  States. 

A  distinguished  writer  against  the  popular  doctrine  of 
inherent  natural  immortality,  has  appeared  in  the  person 
of  the  Regius  Professor  of  Modern  History,  at  Cambridge, 
the  Right  Hon.  Sir  James  Stephen.  The  views  of  this 
writer  are  very  candidly  expressed  in  "  The  Epilogue" 
to  his  recently  published  "  Essays  in  Ecclesiastical  Bio- 
graphy," a  series  of  Papers  originally  contributed  to  the 
Edinburgh  Review.  An  attempt  was  made,  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  which  Sir  James  Stephen  is  a  member  and 
Professor,  to  affix  the  stigma  of  heresy  on  him  for  the 
publication  of  these  opinions ;  the  attempt,  however,  failed. 
The  following  report  appeared  in  the  Times  newspaper,  of 
Thursday,  Oct.  30,  1851.  "  Cambridge.  Congregation. — 
The  Professor  of  Modern  History. — It  was  proposed  by 
the  Rev.  Lucius  Arthur,  M.A.,  of  Trinity  College,  to  offer 
the  following  grace  to  the  Senate,  in  connexion  with  the 
works  of  Sir  James  Stephen  :  '  Cum  falsa  doctrina  in  reli- 
gione  omnino  cavenda  sit  :  Placeat  vobis  ut  fiat  inquisitio 
in  opiniones  a  Professore  Historige  recentiores  vulgatas.' 
Essays  in  Eccles.  Biography  ;  the  Epilogue.  The  grace 
was,  however,  rejected  in  the  caput."  AH  honor  to  the 
Senate  for  resisting  this  piece  of  clerical  impertinence  and 
tyranny  I 


308  BIBLE    VS.    TRADITION APPENDIX. 

It  is  due  to  the  untiring  activity  of  Mr.  George  Storrs, 
of  New- York,  that  we  should  make  honorable  mention  of 
him,  in  connection  w'ith  these  controversies.  Mr.  Storrs  is 
the  editor  of  a  monthly  periodical,  called  the  ''  Bible 
Examiner,"  and  has  written  and  preached  very  extensively 
on  his  side  of  the  Atlantic.  He  has  been  testifying  to 
these  truths  for  the  past  twelve  years,  and  been  the  means 
of  raising  up  many  advocates  of  these  Gospel  principles  in 
different  parts  of  the  States. 

Once  more  the  controversy  is  revived,  both  in  Great 
Britain  and  America,  and  has  been  publicly  acknowledged 
by  several  writers,  who  have  labored  to  fortify  the  popular 
faith.  The  Congregational  I^ecture  of  the  late  Dr.  Winter 
Hamilton,  entitled  "  The  Eevealed  Doctrine  of  Eewards 
and  Punishments,"  and  "  Athanasia  ;  or  Four  Books  on 
Immortality,"  by  the  Eev.  J.  Howard  Hinton,  A.M.,  are 
the  principal  responses  on  the  "  orthodox"  side,  in  Great 
Britain.  Some  writers  and  preachers,  misapprehending 
the  position  of  those  who  advocate  the  natural  mortality  of 
man,  and  that  immortality  is  a  gift  of  God,  communicated 
to  believers  only  through  Christ,  have  helped,  by  their 
unreflecting  and  angry  impatience,  to  foment  much  bitter 
feeling,  and  to  stir  up  a  blind  and  uncharitable  opposition. 
False  and  opprobrious  epithets  have  been  freely  applied  to 
the  advocates  of  the  so-called  "  new  doctrine," — a  mode  of 
warfare  which  is  happily  much  less  harmful  than  it  used  to 
be.  It  is  now  generally  regarded  as  the  evidence  of  a 
weak  cause,  or  personal  inability  to  defend  a  cause,  when 
recourse  is  had  to  opprobrious  name-calHng,  and  offensive 
personalities.  Bullying  is  not  a  legitimate  weapon  in  the 
battle  of  truth,  and  can  never  be  acceptable  except  to  the 
bantling  and  the  bigot.  It  is  to  be  earnestly  hoped,  that 
these  great  fundamental  inquiries  will  be  prosecuted  in  the 
present  age,  in  that  spirit  of  seriousness  and  sanctity  be- 
coming their  nature  and  importance.  We  may  contend 
earnestly  for  the  faith,  without  discourtesy  and  unchari- 
tableness  towards  those  who  differ  from  us  ;  and  a  contest 
courteously  carried  on,  is  most  likely  to  result  in  a  mutual 
agreement,  and  that  in  the  truth. 

"  A  word,  in  conclusion,  on  the  importance  of  the  doctrinal 
inquiries  which  have  been  the  subjects  of  this  historical 
sketch.  Some,  convinced  of  the  unscriptural  character  of 
the  popular  or  ^'  orthodox"  doctrine  of  human  immortahty, 
and  of  the  duty  of  laboring  to  disabuse  the  pubHc  mind  of 


FROM   THE    REFORMATION   TO    THE    PRESENT   TIME.        309 

this  false  doctrine,  yet  disagree  with  those  who  inculcate 
the  implied  truth  of  an  internaediate  state  of  unconscious- 
ness, as  the  condition  of  man  between  death  and  resurrec- 
tion  

The  relation  of  this  doctrine  to  the  Christian  doctrines 
of  resurrection,  and  the  pre-millennial  advent  of  Christ,  is 
obvious.  It  adds  a  new  emphasis  to  the  cry,  "  Come,  Lord 
Jesus  !"  and  gives  a  prominence,  unknown  to  the  popular 
theology,  to  the  official  dignity  of  Christ,  as  the  "  Resur- 
rection and  the  Life."  Besides  the  aspect  of  this  doctrine 
of  unconsciousness  in  death  to  other  related  truths  revealed 
in  the  Scriptures,  its  aspect  towards  certain  errors  is  no 
less  obvious  and  important.  Deprive  Popery  of  these  two 
false  dogmas, — the  immortality  of  the  soul,  and  its  separate 
and  conscious  state  in  death, — and  you  deprive  that  mon- 
ster system  of  spiritual  wickedness  of  its  prestige,  and 
terrible  influence.  Protestantism  is  weak  in  the  presence 
of  this  ancient  foe,  because,  to  a  considerable  extent,  it 
stands  on  a  common  doctrinal  platform.  It  grants  to 
Popery  the  very  foundations  of  its  anti-scriptural  and 
mischievous  dogmas 

Every  behever  of  these  important  truths,  should  add 
the  weight  of  his  personal  testimony,  and  cast  in  all  his 
personal  influence,  to  give  prominence  and  success  to  such 
a  controversy.  There  are  laborers  now  in  the  high  places 
of  the  field,  bearing,  almost  single-handed  and  alone,  the 
burden  and  heat  of  the  day, — whose  voice  unites  with  the 
voice  of  God,  of  Christ,  and  of  the  truth,  urging  their  fel- 
low-behevers  to  come  openly  to  their  help,  and  the  help  of 
the  Lord,  against  the  mighty.  Let  not  this  united  appeal 
be  in  vain.  The  proof  of  faith  is  faithfulness.  He  that 
has  convictions,  if  he  have  also  a  conscience,  will  confess. 
The  claims  are  complete,  which  this  divine  cause  makes 
on  Christian  candor  and  self-denial.  We  trust  they  will 
be  reverently  heeded,  that  this  work  of  reform  may  be 
carried  on  to  its  final  and  triumphant  consummation. 


INDEX. 


4w7t— examination  of,  267 ;  does 
not  mean  **  for  ever,"  268. 

Ainnios — examination  of,  272- 
282  ;  limited  meaning  of, 
272  ;  result  of  the  exami- 
nation of,  274  ;  texts  re- 
lating to  future  punish- 
ment containing  it,  278 
-282. 

il«3e5to— Eusebius'  use  of  it,  223  ; 
no  proof  of  endless  tor- 
ment, 221-224. 

Annihilate— 2Z^. 

Bothmless  Pit— ISO. 

Christ — truly  died,  97  ;  his  soul 
died,  69,  74. 

/)ea<i— unconsciousness  of,  113. 

Death — the  penalty  of  the  law, 
256  ;  figurative  meaning 
of  the  term  seldom  admis- 
sible, 258. 

^Tw— meaning  of,  277. 

Endless  Misery — not  taught  in 
the  Bible,  275 ;  texts  used 
to  sustain  it,  276. 

Everlastings — many  have  passed 
away,  269. 

Eternities — two  limited  ones, 
270. 

Forever— -thQ  end  of,  267. 

Fry's  Translation  of  Job  10  :  8- 
12  verses,  19. 

Gehenna — meaning  of,  215  ;  his- 
tory of,  216 ;  implies  de- 
struction, 217  ;  locality 
of,  218  ;  meaning  of  in 
James  3  :  6  verse,  219  ; 
wholly  consumes,  221- 
226. 

Chave—lSZ 

Ghosts— of  men,  none,  92. 

HarwoocVs  Translation  of  Mat. 
10  :  28  verse,  225. 

Ha^fe5— 207-216;  Dr.  Campbell's 
opinion  of,  208  :  gates  of, 
209. 


Heaven — its  location,  148,  207  ; 

"  third,"  154. 
Heavens — the  third,  148. 
-fleZZ— Pagan,  171  ;  Mahometan, 
174  ;     Roman    Catholic, 
174  ;  Protestant,  175  ;   of 
the   Bible,  177  ;  meaning 
of,  177  ;    no  torment  in, 
199  ;   conclusion  respect- 
ing, 231. 
Historical  Inquiry — into  the  ori- 
gin of  the  doctrine  of  in- 
herent immortality,  283- 
309. 
Immortal — the  soul  not,  49  ;  the 
spirit  not,  108:    the  mind 
not,  113. 
Immortality — its  source,  131 ;  pe- 
culiar   to  the   rii'hteous, 
130. 

Mortal — names  of  man  indicate 
mortality,  54. 

Nepkesh — the  soul,  31  j  is  properly 
rendered  "  person,"  42  j 
corresponds  with  psuche^ 
11,  12  ;  Parkhurst's  re- 
marks on,  15.     See  Spirit, 

iVe5??ig— meaning  of,  14,  15. 

New  Jerusalem — where,  148. 

Life — is  the  great  promise,  257  ; 
terms  used  to  convey  the 
promise  of,  259 ;  figurative 
meaning  of  the  term  sel- 
dom admissible,  258. 

Lake  of  Fire,  22^. 

Lower  parts  of  the  Earth,  229. 

Oiilom — meaning  of,  262  ;  limit- 
ed, 264. 

Paradise — location  of,  148. 

Pauls  desire  to  depart — 136. 

Penalty — of  the  law,  61. 

Pneuma — 84.     See  Spirit. 

Pit^l78. 

Prison-'lSi. 

Psuche-^vise  of  the  term,  87-39  j 
SeeSoiU. 


INDEX, 


Penitent  Thi€f-^1S9. 

Resurrection— the  only  hope,  124. 

i?waA~84  ;  corresponds  witli 
Pneumaj  12.     See  Spirit. 

Rich  Man  and  Lazarus-'-214i, 
283-286. 

Scriptures— csLUtion  necessary  in 
the  interpretation  of,  157  ; 
corruption  of,  10 ;  the 
original  the  only  stand* 
ard,  6  ;  translation  defec- 
tive/i6-;  Vulgate,  the  basis 
of  the  common  version, 
9  ;  translators  unfaithful, 
8,  71,  122  ;  a  new  transla- 
tion needed,  8. 

Stepken*s  case  considered — 98. 

Sheal'-'lSb.     See  Hades. 

Sflul — meaning  of,  11  ;  number 
of  times  it  occurs,  14,  16  ; 
less  than  is  assumed,  16  ; 
not  a  ghost,  17,  21  ;  not  a 
part  of  God,  18  ;  is  of  the 
dust,  19  ;  is  born,  20,  21  ; 
not  a  spirit,  21  ;  ani- 
mal nature  of,  22  ;  not  a 
living  thing  apart  from 
the  body,  26 ;  not  the 
mind,  27  ;  is  a  creature, 
animal,  or  person,  31,  42  ; 
eats  and  drinks,  40  ;  can 
be  killed,  43;  is  self,  44; 
term  often  rendered  heart 
and  mind,  45  ;  is  the  man, 
46  ;  faints,  53  ;  can  be  cut 
off,  58 ;  smitten  with  a 
sword,  59  ;  dies,  61  ;  un- 
conscious of  itself,  61  ; 
identical  with  the  person, 
66  J  enters  the  grave,  67  ; 


not  conscious  in  deatli, 
113  ;  does  not  snrvive  m 
death,  113, 121.  There  arc 
dead  souls,  12,  47,  75 ; 
beasts  are  souls,  31. 

Spirit — meaning  of  the  term,  12  : 
what  is  it  1  84  ;  means  air. 
wind,  breath,  87,  8?  ; 
breath  identical ,90 ;  mind, 
temper,  101-106  ;  the  per- 
son, 106 ;  not  susceptible 
of  life,  108 ;  not  mortal 
nor  immortal,  108;  cut 
otf,  loa 

Strictures'^on  Dr.  Adam  Clarke, 
212  ;  on  Professor  Stuart, 
199,  262,  276. 

Tophet — meaning  of  the  terra, 
216  ;  same  aa  Gehenna, 
217. 

TV^rtor1/.5--230. 

Transjiguration-^l  62. 

Texts  J llustrated—M3it  10:  28, 
p.  170;  1  Cor.  15:  44,  pp. 
25,  130;  Phil.  1:  21,  p 
136  ;  Ps.  16  :  10,  p.  205  : 
Matt.  25  •  46,  pp.  279-281' 
and  many  others,  too  nu- 
merous to  insert  in  the 
Index. 

Wicked — final  destiny  of,  233; 
must  perish,  235;  be  des- 
troyed, 239 ;  be  annihi- 
lated, 239 ;  destruction 
come  on,  171,  241  ;  be 
devoured,  243 ;  be  con 
sumed,  244  ;  burned  with 
fire,  246  J  cease  to  exist 
249. 


FOR   SALE    AT  BIBLE   EXAMINER   OFFICE, 
140  FUL.TON  STREET.  NEUT-YOBK. 

Postage  can  be  pre  paid,  or  paid  on  delivery ,  as  the  purchaser  may 
choose.  Works  not  weighing:  over  3  oz.  can  be  sent  to  any  part  of  the 
United  States  for  one  cent,  if  pre-paid,  or  two  cents  if  paid  on  delivery. 
Books  bounds  or  unbound,  one  cent  per  oz.  under  3000  miles :  one-half 
cent  to  be  added  if  not  pre-paid.  Tracts  half  cent  per  oz.  if  sent  in 
packages  of  not  less  than  eig/if,  oiinces^  otherwise  subject'to  same  postage 
as  three  oz.  pamphlets,  each. 

1.  ScRiPTuwE  Doctrine  of  Future  Punishment,  by  H.  H.  Dobney," 
Baptist  minister ;  an  argument  in  two  parts.  This  is  a  work  of  great 
power,  showing  the  Righteous  ordy  will  live  Forever^  286  pages.  Price 
60  cts.  bound.     Weight  18  oz.     In  paper  covers  37  1-2  cts  :  wgt.  9  oz> 

2.  "  DoBNKY  Abridged." — Or,  the  Second  Part  of  the  Scripture  Doc- 
trine of  Future  Punishment,  in  an  edition  by  itself.  It  contains  all 
that  is  really  essential  in  the  controversy,  to  enable  the  reader  to  decide 
whether  eiyikss  torture^  or  destruction  of  being,  is  the  true  teaching  of 
Scripture.  We  put  it  at  the  extremely  low  price  of  25  cents,  in  paper 
covers.     Weight  6  oz. 

3.  **  The  Unity  of  Man,  or  Life  and  Death  Realities.— A  Reply 
to  Rev.  Luther  Lee,  by  Anthropos."  This  is  a  thorough  refutation  of 
Mr.  Lee's  position  of  the  natural  immortality  of  man.  Price  16  cents. 
Weight  3  oz. 

4.  'Six  Skrmons,  by  Geo.  Storrs.  An  inquiry.  Are  the  Wicked  Im- 
rtwrtal  7  '  To  which  is  added  a  dissertation  on  the  "State  of  the  Dead  ;" 
QXiH prefixed  Arclibishop  Whately's  remarks  on  the  "The  Second 
DeathJ'     Price  15  cents.  -^Weight  3  oz. 

6.  *'  Storrs'  Misckllany  " — It  contains  the  foregoing  Nos.  4  and  5, 
with  a  variety  of  other  matter,  bound.     Price  50  cents.^    Wgt.  9  oz» 

6.  "  Thk  Generations  Gathkrkd  and  Gathering  ;  or,  The  Scripture 
Doctrine  of  Man  in  Death.  By  J.  Pan  ton  Ham,"  Congregational  minis- 
ter, England.     Price  10  cents.     Weight  2  oz. 

7.  '"Life  and  Death  ;  or.  The  Theology  of  the  Bible  in  Relation  to 
Huniaii  Inimorioliiy.  Three  Lectures,  by  J.  Panton  Ham."  A  most 
interesting  work  in  connection  with  his  other,  above  named.  Price 
and  weight  same  as  the  other. 

8.  "  Bible  vs  Tradition." — Price  75  cts.     Weight  about  16  oz. 
On  the  foregoing  works  one- third  discount  will  be  made,  for  cash, 

to  wholesale  purchasers. 

9.  "The  Bible  Examiner,"  super  royal  octavo,  sixteen  pages,  is 
published  nionlMy,  at  one  dollar  for  twelve  numbers.  Payrtient  always 
in  advance,  li^  object  \s  an  examination  of  the  Scriptures — in  their 
prophetic  revelations,  doctrinal  instructions,  and  practical  use,  but 
especially  to  illustate  and  defend  the  great  gospel  truth — *'  No  ImmoV' 
tality,  nor  Endless  Life,  except  through  Jesus  Christ  alone." 

10.  Bible  Examiner  for  '50  and  '51,  bound  in  one  vol.  Price  SI. 50. 
Also  in  sheets  for  '49,  '50,  and  '51.  Price  50  cents  for  each  year:  and 
for  '52,  price  75  cents. 

11.  *'  Bible  Examiner,  Extra." — New  Edition.  It  contains  Bishop 
Whately's  remarks  on  "  Second  Death" — "  Endless  Misery,"  by  Bishop 
Newton — Our  "Six  Sermons,"  &c.,  16  pages,  quarto,  and  sold  at  the 
extreme  low  price  of  S2.50per  100,  or  5  cts.  single  copy.      Wgt.  2  oz. 

A  variety  of  T  racts  also  can  be  had  of  us  on  the  foregoing  topics. — 
All  orders  and  communications  must  be  addressed, 

GEO.  STORRS,  New-  York. 


fit 


nc 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

RENEWALS  ONLY~-TEL.  NO.  642^405 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 
on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 


m 


jmn"^ 


RECEIVED  BY 


JUN    91986 


dscuuTioN  DEn; 


25'69-'7P^ 


LD21A-60m-6,'69 
(J9096sl0)476-A-32 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


^mHAL 


YB  28231 


'■'BffARY .  u,c. 


B^HKELEY 


^WH 


